Student ID Lanyard

[Anonymous]

My nieces were doing this in SF 10 years ago. It’s ok. Nothing happened. They moved on.

Stop making this a big deal. Do use on real issues.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There's no rigor behind it. They don't scan or check every kid individually. They just rely on admin and security to eyeball the kids as they come in. As you can imagine, there is enough admin and security to do this thoroughly for all kids so some kids can and do get by the so-called ID badge entry requirement.

Richard Montgomery's student newspaper quoted a student who pointed out how easy it was to bypass the ID requirement and still get into the school: https://thermtide.com/18687/news/rm-ramps-up-hallway-security-measures/

Meanwhile, other students think the cards could be a good thing but are not used properly. “I think [the ID cards] would help. However, I do think security does a bad job of checking them. Today I walked into school without showing my ID card because there was no security guard there,” sophomore Coby Ritter said. “If the ID cards implemented it right it will go well but that takes effort.”

MCPS isn't a jail.

How does that response address the fact that the solution has Swiss cheese-sized holes in it? And if you don't actually intend for the solution to be resourced seriously and with fidelity, why implement it? People aren't stupid.

As a teacher, if I see a student doing something dangerous and I don't know the student's name, a readily seen student ID card helps teachers report the incident. If you want to close Swiss-cheese holes in the MCPS student-ID practice, you will find that difficult. The schools aren't detention centers.

And that’s fine. The student ID badge system doesn’t have to be 100% airtight to be valuable.

The issue is that MCPS and school leaders present this student ID badge as if it were to be implemented with tight fidelity to assuage community concerns about safety. MCPS should manage expectations around it and be honest instead of pretending that the ID badge requirement will be something it’s not.

Policy without meaningful enforcement has long been what ails MCPS.

You're are the one saying that. You're the one trying to find faults in anything and everything

So the student at RM who said enforcement was lax and not good is also trying to find fault in anything? Your head is in the sand.

Why are you making this into a molehill. No one’s head is buried except maybe yours. It’s one random student who was probably asked and they gave their observation. Were they there for every single minute of every day to ensure this “gap?” Please. If after they implement this across the board and schools are not in compliance it most likely will be addressed.

And you have this confidence that MCPS will quickly and effectively address these gaps, that weren’t addressed in the pilot, once it’s rolled out systemwide because…?

And how do you know they were not addressed after that? That's the purpose of the "pilot" stage.
You just like to complain and find faults.

If it was addressed and that gap was closed in the pilot stage, then that should have been disclosed in its announcement about the systemwide rollout. A smart organization that understood how to do strategic planning and communication would have done that. But MCPS didn’t.

Why are you so confident about me and what I like to do and my motivations? Don’t you think you’re investing a lot of energy in making up personal attacks on a forum of anonymous posters? I don’t know you and you don’t know me, so leave the personal attacks and accusations out of this.

LOL.
You think they have to disclose everything to the general public?
You're definitely a troll

[Anonymous]

Noticed this in the recent posts. I'm in another school district. It took a few years for compliance to reach a decent number, from what the admins shared with us. The incoming 9th graders got a really strict talk about needing to wear the IDs and they many have kept an eye on the younger kids a little more.

A few years out, everyone had left who remembered never wearing an ID and it was a lot easier.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sounds like your school is dangerous. No, our school doesn't do this.

My school is not dangerous. And this new rule will help us be even safer.

Even though students are telling you that there are serious gaps in enforcement?

We haven’t started it yet so how can there already be gaps 🤔

Kids will rise to the standard you hold them to.

Well, it seems if kids are allowed to attach the IDs to their backpack, then there is a gap in the standard, unless they are required to keep their backpack with them at all times.

I’m not sure what school your children attend but at least at my kid’s school there are no lockers assigned. So yes, students almost always have their backpack in arms reach.

PP here
My HS kids didn’t use lockers, either. I agree that MOST of the time, MOST of the students would have had their backpacks within reach, but that’s not the point. The fact that there are SOME times where SOME students won’t have their backpacks means that if an individual is seen without ID, they can claim that it is on their backpack - elsewhere (ex. “I’m just going to the bathroom and it’s in the classroom.” “I accidentally left it on the bus.”). For the majority of the kids, having it on their backpack will work just fine, but those aren’t the ones that would be causing trouble in the first place. On the other hand, if someone who doesn’t belong in a school comes in to cause trouble, lying about the absence of their backpack seems negligible in comparison.

This feels like an easy resolution, if they need it they unclip it from their backpack and take it with them. I’m not saying my kids overall strategy works for every person in every moment, I’m saying that it isn’t really a big deal for people who aren’t trying to find a problem for every solution.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sounds like your school is dangerous. No, our school doesn't do this.

My school is not dangerous. And this new rule will help us be even safer.

Even though students are telling you that there are serious gaps in enforcement?

We haven’t started it yet so how can there already be gaps 🤔

Kids will rise to the standard you hold them to.

Well, it seems if kids are allowed to attach the IDs to their backpack, then there is a gap in the standard, unless they are required to keep their backpack with them at all times.

I’m not sure what school your children attend but at least at my kid’s school there are no lockers assigned. So yes, students almost always have their backpack in arms reach.

PP here
My HS kids didn’t use lockers, either. I agree that MOST of the time, MOST of the students would have had their backpacks within reach, but that’s not the point. The fact that there are SOME times where SOME students won’t have their backpacks means that if an individual is seen without ID, they can claim that it is on their backpack - elsewhere (ex. “I’m just going to the bathroom and it’s in the classroom.” “I accidentally left it on the bus.”). For the majority of the kids, having it on their backpack will work just fine, but those aren’t the ones that would be causing trouble in the first place. On the other hand, if someone who doesn’t belong in a school comes in to cause trouble, lying about the absence of their backpack seems negligible in comparison.

Then they wear it. Simple. If they can remember their phones, they can remember their id.

You seem to lack critical reading skills. If the PP outlined a way kids might get around the system by pretending to have an ID on their backpack, which they don’t have on their person, how is “Then they wear it” a logical response?

They aren’t wearing it in the scenario outlined because they either aren’t actually a student at that school or they lost/forgot their ID. So now what? What’s the consequence?

No I’d, you get sent to the office and sent home.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sounds like your school is dangerous. No, our school doesn't do this.

My school is not dangerous. And this new rule will help us be even safer.

Even though students are telling you that there are serious gaps in enforcement?

We haven’t started it yet so how can there already be gaps 🤔

Kids will rise to the standard you hold them to.

Well, it seems if kids are allowed to attach the IDs to their backpack, then there is a gap in the standard, unless they are required to keep their backpack with them at all times.

I’m not sure what school your children attend but at least at my kid’s school there are no lockers assigned. So yes, students almost always have their backpack in arms reach.

PP here
My HS kids didn’t use lockers, either. I agree that MOST of the time, MOST of the students would have had their backpacks within reach, but that’s not the point. The fact that there are SOME times where SOME students won’t have their backpacks means that if an individual is seen without ID, they can claim that it is on their backpack - elsewhere (ex. “I’m just going to the bathroom and it’s in the classroom.” “I accidentally left it on the bus.”). For the majority of the kids, having it on their backpack will work just fine, but those aren’t the ones that would be causing trouble in the first place. On the other hand, if someone who doesn’t belong in a school comes in to cause trouble, lying about the absence of their backpack seems negligible in comparison.

Then they wear it. Simple. If they can remember their phones, they can remember their id.

You seem to lack critical reading skills. If the PP outlined a way kids might get around the system by pretending to have an ID on their backpack, which they don’t have on their person, how is “Then they wear it” a logical response?

They aren’t wearing it in the scenario outlined because they either aren’t actually a student at that school or they lost/forgot their ID. So now what? What’s the consequence?

No I’d, you get sent to the office and sent home.

Do you think MCPS would seriously have the spine and gumption to enforce its policy that harshly and severely? I’m all for it but MCPS has made it clear that it is averse to “punitive” discipline like the kind you are suggesting.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There's no rigor behind it. They don't scan or check every kid individually. They just rely on admin and security to eyeball the kids as they come in. As you can imagine, there is enough admin and security to do this thoroughly for all kids so some kids can and do get by the so-called ID badge entry requirement.

Richard Montgomery's student newspaper quoted a student who pointed out how easy it was to bypass the ID requirement and still get into the school: https://thermtide.com/18687/news/rm-ramps-up-hallway-security-measures/

Meanwhile, other students think the cards could be a good thing but are not used properly. “I think [the ID cards] would help. However, I do think security does a bad job of checking them. Today I walked into school without showing my ID card because there was no security guard there,” sophomore Coby Ritter said. “If the ID cards implemented it right it will go well but that takes effort.”

MCPS isn't a jail.

How does that response address the fact that the solution has Swiss cheese-sized holes in it? And if you don't actually intend for the solution to be resourced seriously and with fidelity, why implement it? People aren't stupid.

As a teacher, if I see a student doing something dangerous and I don't know the student's name, a readily seen student ID card helps teachers report the incident. If you want to close Swiss-cheese holes in the MCPS student-ID practice, you will find that difficult. The schools aren't detention centers.

And that’s fine. The student ID badge system doesn’t have to be 100% airtight to be valuable.

The issue is that MCPS and school leaders present this student ID badge as if it were to be implemented with tight fidelity to assuage community concerns about safety. MCPS should manage expectations around it and be honest instead of pretending that the ID badge requirement will be something it’s not.

Policy without meaningful enforcement has long been what ails MCPS.

You're are the one saying that. You're the one trying to find faults in anything and everything

So the student at RM who said enforcement was lax and not good is also trying to find fault in anything? Your head is in the sand.

Why are you making this into a molehill. No one’s head is buried except maybe yours. It’s one random student who was probably asked and they gave their observation. Were they there for every single minute of every day to ensure this “gap?” Please. If after they implement this across the board and schools are not in compliance it most likely will be addressed.

And you have this confidence that MCPS will quickly and effectively address these gaps, that weren’t addressed in the pilot, once it’s rolled out systemwide because…?

And how do you know they were not addressed after that? That's the purpose of the "pilot" stage.
You just like to complain and find faults.

If it was addressed and that gap was closed in the pilot stage, then that should have been disclosed in its announcement about the systemwide rollout. A smart organization that understood how to do strategic planning and communication would have done that. But MCPS didn’t.

Why are you so confident about me and what I like to do and my motivations? Don’t you think you’re investing a lot of energy in making up personal attacks on a forum of anonymous posters? I don’t know you and you don’t know me, so leave the personal attacks and accusations out of this.

LOL.
You think they have to disclose everything to the general public?
You're definitely a troll

Yes, our public school system, which is a public institution funded by the public’s tax paying dollars, has an obligation to explain its decision making process and communicate openly and transparently.

Is the concept of public schools new to you?

A systemwide policy change, based on learnings from a pilot, is precisely the kind of thing that should be discussed openly through the BOE and other community communications.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sounds like your school is dangerous. No, our school doesn't do this.

My school is not dangerous. And this new rule will help us be even safer.

Even though students are telling you that there are serious gaps in enforcement?

We haven’t started it yet so how can there already be gaps 🤔

Kids will rise to the standard you hold them to.

Well, it seems if kids are allowed to attach the IDs to their backpack, then there is a gap in the standard, unless they are required to keep their backpack with them at all times.

I’m not sure what school your children attend but at least at my kid’s school there are no lockers assigned. So yes, students almost always have their backpack in arms reach.

PP here
My HS kids didn’t use lockers, either. I agree that MOST of the time, MOST of the students would have had their backpacks within reach, but that’s not the point. The fact that there are SOME times where SOME students won’t have their backpacks means that if an individual is seen without ID, they can claim that it is on their backpack - elsewhere (ex. “I’m just going to the bathroom and it’s in the classroom.” “I accidentally left it on the bus.”). For the majority of the kids, having it on their backpack will work just fine, but those aren’t the ones that would be causing trouble in the first place. On the other hand, if someone who doesn’t belong in a school comes in to cause trouble, lying about the absence of their backpack seems negligible in comparison.

Then they wear it. Simple. If they can remember their phones, they can remember their id.

You seem to lack critical reading skills. If the PP outlined a way kids might get around the system by pretending to have an ID on their backpack, which they don’t have on their person, how is “Then they wear it” a logical response?

They aren’t wearing it in the scenario outlined because they either aren’t actually a student at that school or they lost/forgot their ID. So now what? What’s the consequence?

No I’d, you get sent to the office and sent home.

Already MCPS teachers complain that admin tell them not to send kids to the office for repeat and egregious student behaviors. What makes you think admin will be open and receptive to teachers sending a bunch of kids to the office for not having their IDs on them?

Admin have made it clear they want to deal with issues with kids and would prefer to pass the buck on to teachers or just ignore these inconveniences altogether.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There's no rigor behind it. They don't scan or check every kid individually. They just rely on admin and security to eyeball the kids as they come in. As you can imagine, there is enough admin and security to do this thoroughly for all kids so some kids can and do get by the so-called ID badge entry requirement.

Richard Montgomery's student newspaper quoted a student who pointed out how easy it was to bypass the ID requirement and still get into the school: https://thermtide.com/18687/news/rm-ramps-up-hallway-security-measures/

Meanwhile, other students think the cards could be a good thing but are not used properly. “I think [the ID cards] would help. However, I do think security does a bad job of checking them. Today I walked into school without showing my ID card because there was no security guard there,” sophomore Coby Ritter said. “If the ID cards implemented it right it will go well but that takes effort.”

MCPS isn't a jail.

How does that response address the fact that the solution has Swiss cheese-sized holes in it? And if you don't actually intend for the solution to be resourced seriously and with fidelity, why implement it? People aren't stupid.

As a teacher, if I see a student doing something dangerous and I don't know the student's name, a readily seen student ID card helps teachers report the incident. If you want to close Swiss-cheese holes in the MCPS student-ID practice, you will find that difficult. The schools aren't detention centers.

And that’s fine. The student ID badge system doesn’t have to be 100% airtight to be valuable.

The issue is that MCPS and school leaders present this student ID badge as if it were to be implemented with tight fidelity to assuage community concerns about safety. MCPS should manage expectations around it and be honest instead of pretending that the ID badge requirement will be something it’s not.

Policy without meaningful enforcement has long been what ails MCPS.

You're are the one saying that. You're the one trying to find faults in anything and everything

So the student at RM who said enforcement was lax and not good is also trying to find fault in anything? Your head is in the sand.

Why are you making this into a molehill. No one’s head is buried except maybe yours. It’s one random student who was probably asked and they gave their observation. Were they there for every single minute of every day to ensure this “gap?” Please. If after they implement this across the board and schools are not in compliance it most likely will be addressed.

And you have this confidence that MCPS will quickly and effectively address these gaps, that weren’t addressed in the pilot, once it’s rolled out systemwide because…?

And how do you know they were not addressed after that? That's the purpose of the "pilot" stage.
You just like to complain and find faults.

If it was addressed and that gap was closed in the pilot stage, then that should have been disclosed in its announcement about the systemwide rollout. A smart organization that understood how to do strategic planning and communication would have done that. But MCPS didn’t.

Why are you so confident about me and what I like to do and my motivations? Don’t you think you’re investing a lot of energy in making up personal attacks on a forum of anonymous posters? I don’t know you and you don’t know me, so leave the personal attacks and accusations out of this.

LOL.
You think they have to disclose everything to the general public?
You're definitely a troll

Yes, our public school system, which is a public institution funded by the public’s tax paying dollars, has an obligation to explain its decision making process and communicate openly and transparently.

Is the concept of public schools new to you?

A systemwide policy change, based on learnings from a pilot, is precisely the kind of thing that should be discussed openly through the BOE and other community communications.

This is included as part of the safety and security update on the agenda at Tuesday's board meeting.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There's no rigor behind it. They don't scan or check every kid individually. They just rely on admin and security to eyeball the kids as they come in. As you can imagine, there is enough admin and security to do this thoroughly for all kids so some kids can and do get by the so-called ID badge entry requirement.

Richard Montgomery's student newspaper quoted a student who pointed out how easy it was to bypass the ID requirement and still get into the school: https://thermtide.com/18687/news/rm-ramps-up-hallway-security-measures/

Meanwhile, other students think the cards could be a good thing but are not used properly. “I think [the ID cards] would help. However, I do think security does a bad job of checking them. Today I walked into school without showing my ID card because there was no security guard there,” sophomore Coby Ritter said. “If the ID cards implemented it right it will go well but that takes effort.”

MCPS isn't a jail.

How does that response address the fact that the solution has Swiss cheese-sized holes in it? And if you don't actually intend for the solution to be resourced seriously and with fidelity, why implement it? People aren't stupid.

As a teacher, if I see a student doing something dangerous and I don't know the student's name, a readily seen student ID card helps teachers report the incident. If you want to close Swiss-cheese holes in the MCPS student-ID practice, you will find that difficult. The schools aren't detention centers.

And that’s fine. The student ID badge system doesn’t have to be 100% airtight to be valuable.

The issue is that MCPS and school leaders present this student ID badge as if it were to be implemented with tight fidelity to assuage community concerns about safety. MCPS should manage expectations around it and be honest instead of pretending that the ID badge requirement will be something it’s not.

Policy without meaningful enforcement has long been what ails MCPS.

You're are the one saying that. You're the one trying to find faults in anything and everything

So the student at RM who said enforcement was lax and not good is also trying to find fault in anything? Your head is in the sand.

Why are you making this into a molehill. No one’s head is buried except maybe yours. It’s one random student who was probably asked and they gave their observation. Were they there for every single minute of every day to ensure this “gap?” Please. If after they implement this across the board and schools are not in compliance it most likely will be addressed.

And you have this confidence that MCPS will quickly and effectively address these gaps, that weren’t addressed in the pilot, once it’s rolled out systemwide because…?

And how do you know they were not addressed after that? That's the purpose of the "pilot" stage.
You just like to complain and find faults.

If it was addressed and that gap was closed in the pilot stage, then that should have been disclosed in its announcement about the systemwide rollout. A smart organization that understood how to do strategic planning and communication would have done that. But MCPS didn’t.

Why are you so confident about me and what I like to do and my motivations? Don’t you think you’re investing a lot of energy in making up personal attacks on a forum of anonymous posters? I don’t know you and you don’t know me, so leave the personal attacks and accusations out of this.

LOL.
You think they have to disclose everything to the general public?
You're definitely a troll

Yes, our public school system, which is a public institution funded by the public’s tax paying dollars, has an obligation to explain its decision making process and communicate openly and transparently.

Is the concept of public schools new to you?

A systemwide policy change, based on learnings from a pilot, is precisely the kind of thing that should be discussed openly through the BOE and other community communications.

This is included as part of the safety and security update on the agenda at Tuesday's board meeting.

Any adjustments or learnings based on the pilot schools were definitely not mentioned in the written update that has been uploaded to BoardDocs ahead of the 8/20 BOE meeting. But if Taylor plans to address that in his verbal comments to the BOE, then good. If he doesn’t, then that’s not good on MCPS’s part.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sounds like your school is dangerous. No, our school doesn't do this.

My school is not dangerous. And this new rule will help us be even safer.

Even though students are telling you that there are serious gaps in enforcement?

We haven’t started it yet so how can there already be gaps 🤔

Kids will rise to the standard you hold them to.

Well, it seems if kids are allowed to attach the IDs to their backpack, then there is a gap in the standard, unless they are required to keep their backpack with them at all times.

I’m not sure what school your children attend but at least at my kid’s school there are no lockers assigned. So yes, students almost always have their backpack in arms reach.

PP here
My HS kids didn’t use lockers, either. I agree that MOST of the time, MOST of the students would have had their backpacks within reach, but that’s not the point. The fact that there are SOME times where SOME students won’t have their backpacks means that if an individual is seen without ID, they can claim that it is on their backpack - elsewhere (ex. “I’m just going to the bathroom and it’s in the classroom.” “I accidentally left it on the bus.”). For the majority of the kids, having it on their backpack will work just fine, but those aren’t the ones that would be causing trouble in the first place. On the other hand, if someone who doesn’t belong in a school comes in to cause trouble, lying about the absence of their backpack seems negligible in comparison.

Then they wear it. Simple. If they can remember their phones, they can remember their id.

You seem to lack critical reading skills. If the PP outlined a way kids might get around the system by pretending to have an ID on their backpack, which they don’t have on their person, how is “Then they wear it” a logical response?

They aren’t wearing it in the scenario outlined because they either aren’t actually a student at that school or they lost/forgot their ID. So now what? What’s the consequence?

No I’d, you get sent to the office and sent home.

At our kids MCPS school they were sent to the office to get a temporary ID. They could use the temporary ID for a set number of days and if they didn’t have their regular ID back by then the school sent a bill home for a replacement.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sounds like your school is dangerous. No, our school doesn't do this.

My school is not dangerous. And this new rule will help us be even safer.

Even though students are telling you that there are serious gaps in enforcement?

We haven’t started it yet so how can there already be gaps 🤔

Kids will rise to the standard you hold them to.

Well, it seems if kids are allowed to attach the IDs to their backpack, then there is a gap in the standard, unless they are required to keep their backpack with them at all times.

I’m not sure what school your children attend but at least at my kid’s school there are no lockers assigned. So yes, students almost always have their backpack in arms reach.

PP here
My HS kids didn’t use lockers, either. I agree that MOST of the time, MOST of the students would have had their backpacks within reach, but that’s not the point. The fact that there are SOME times where SOME students won’t have their backpacks means that if an individual is seen without ID, they can claim that it is on their backpack - elsewhere (ex. “I’m just going to the bathroom and it’s in the classroom.” “I accidentally left it on the bus.”). For the majority of the kids, having it on their backpack will work just fine, but those aren’t the ones that would be causing trouble in the first place. On the other hand, if someone who doesn’t belong in a school comes in to cause trouble, lying about the absence of their backpack seems negligible in comparison.

Then they wear it. Simple. If they can remember their phones, they can remember their id.

You seem to lack critical reading skills. If the PP outlined a way kids might get around the system by pretending to have an ID on their backpack, which they don’t have on their person, how is “Then they wear it” a logical response?

They aren’t wearing it in the scenario outlined because they either aren’t actually a student at that school or they lost/forgot their ID. So now what? What’s the consequence?

No I’d, you get sent to the office and sent home.

Already MCPS teachers complain that admin tell them not to send kids to the office for repeat and egregious student behaviors. What makes you think admin will be open and receptive to teachers sending a bunch of kids to the office for not having their IDs on them?

Admin have made it clear they want to deal with issues with kids and would prefer to pass the buck on to teachers or just ignore these inconveniences altogether.

Teachers should deal with it first but if not that’s the admins job. Admin need to enforce the rules.

[Anonymous]

Admin does not support teachers. MCPS is scared of parents once they lawyer up.

Only the rich can afford to lawyer up. All the low income, black and brown kids continue to get screwed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sounds like your school is dangerous. No, our school doesn't do this.

My school is not dangerous. And this new rule will help us be even safer.

Even though students are telling you that there are serious gaps in enforcement?

We haven’t started it yet so how can there already be gaps 🤔

Kids will rise to the standard you hold them to.

Well, it seems if kids are allowed to attach the IDs to their backpack, then there is a gap in the standard, unless they are required to keep their backpack with them at all times.

I’m not sure what school your children attend but at least at my kid’s school there are no lockers assigned. So yes, students almost always have their backpack in arms reach.

PP here
My HS kids didn’t use lockers, either. I agree that MOST of the time, MOST of the students would have had their backpacks within reach, but that’s not the point. The fact that there are SOME times where SOME students won’t have their backpacks means that if an individual is seen without ID, they can claim that it is on their backpack - elsewhere (ex. “I’m just going to the bathroom and it’s in the classroom.” “I accidentally left it on the bus.”). For the majority of the kids, having it on their backpack will work just fine, but those aren’t the ones that would be causing trouble in the first place. On the other hand, if someone who doesn’t belong in a school comes in to cause trouble, lying about the absence of their backpack seems negligible in comparison.

Then they wear it. Simple. If they can remember their phones, they can remember their id.

You seem to lack critical reading skills. If the PP outlined a way kids might get around the system by pretending to have an ID on their backpack, which they don’t have on their person, how is “Then they wear it” a logical response?

They aren’t wearing it in the scenario outlined because they either aren’t actually a student at that school or they lost/forgot their ID. So now what? What’s the consequence?

No I’d, you get sent to the office and sent home.

Do you think MCPS would seriously have the spine and gumption to enforce its policy that harshly and severely? I’m all for it but MCPS has made it clear that it is averse to “punitive” discipline like the kind you are suggesting.

Mcps needs to hold kids accountable.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There's no rigor behind it. They don't scan or check every kid individually. They just rely on admin and security to eyeball the kids as they come in. As you can imagine, there is enough admin and security to do this thoroughly for all kids so some kids can and do get by the so-called ID badge entry requirement.

Richard Montgomery's student newspaper quoted a student who pointed out how easy it was to bypass the ID requirement and still get into the school: https://thermtide.com/18687/news/rm-ramps-up-hallway-security-measures/

Meanwhile, other students think the cards could be a good thing but are not used properly. “I think [the ID cards] would help. However, I do think security does a bad job of checking them. Today I walked into school without showing my ID card because there was no security guard there,” sophomore Coby Ritter said. “If the ID cards implemented it right it will go well but that takes effort.”

MCPS isn't a jail.

How does that response address the fact that the solution has Swiss cheese-sized holes in it? And if you don't actually intend for the solution to be resourced seriously and with fidelity, why implement it? People aren't stupid.

As a teacher, if I see a student doing something dangerous and I don't know the student's name, a readily seen student ID card helps teachers report the incident. If you want to close Swiss-cheese holes in the MCPS student-ID practice, you will find that difficult. The schools aren't detention centers.

And that’s fine. The student ID badge system doesn’t have to be 100% airtight to be valuable.

The issue is that MCPS and school leaders present this student ID badge as if it were to be implemented with tight fidelity to assuage community concerns about safety. MCPS should manage expectations around it and be honest instead of pretending that the ID badge requirement will be something it’s not.

Policy without meaningful enforcement has long been what ails MCPS.

You're are the one saying that. You're the one trying to find faults in anything and everything

So the student at RM who said enforcement was lax and not good is also trying to find fault in anything? Your head is in the sand.

Why are you making this into a molehill. No one’s head is buried except maybe yours. It’s one random student who was probably asked and they gave their observation. Were they there for every single minute of every day to ensure this “gap?” Please. If after they implement this across the board and schools are not in compliance it most likely will be addressed.

And you have this confidence that MCPS will quickly and effectively address these gaps, that weren’t addressed in the pilot, once it’s rolled out systemwide because…?

And how do you know they were not addressed after that? That's the purpose of the "pilot" stage.
You just like to complain and find faults.

If it was addressed and that gap was closed in the pilot stage, then that should have been disclosed in its announcement about the systemwide rollout. A smart organization that understood how to do strategic planning and communication would have done that. But MCPS didn’t.

Why are you so confident about me and what I like to do and my motivations? Don’t you think you’re investing a lot of energy in making up personal attacks on a forum of anonymous posters? I don’t know you and you don’t know me, so leave the personal attacks and accusations out of this.

LOL.
You think they have to disclose everything to the general public?
You're definitely a troll

Yes, our public school system, which is a public institution funded by the public’s tax paying dollars, has an obligation to explain its decision making process and communicate openly and transparently.

Is the concept of public schools new to you?

A systemwide policy change, based on learnings from a pilot, is precisely the kind of thing that should be discussed openly through the BOE and other community communications.

LOL. In what world are you living?
No public institution, no government agency has to disclose everything to you, even as a taxpayer. And that is even more true when it comes to security.
Get a life and stop trolling this forum.