Clueless kids on bus

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:One of the other downsides of tracking students is often the children who are told they are smart learn to just rely on innate abilities instead of learning good studying habits and work ethic. They often quit easily when something is hard because they assume that being smart will just solve all of their problems.

TRACKING!!!! DID YOU SAY TRACKING??? OH THE HORROR....THAT IS NOT HAPPENING IN FAIRFAX COUNTY!!!!

[Anonymous]

Exactly. Enough with the Manichean novellas where the AAP kids are always the villains.

No. In many cases they are the victims. When they don't get into TJ, they consider themselves failures.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:One of the other downsides of tracking students is often the children who are told they are smart learn to just rely on innate abilities instead of learning good studying habits and work ethic. They often quit easily when something is hard because they assume that being smart will just solve all of their problems.

TRACKING!!!! DID YOU SAY TRACKING??? OH THE HORROR....THAT IS NOT HAPPENING IN FAIRFAX COUNTY!!!!

Tracking isn't done until much later in countries with much higher test scores than ours. The theory is that the kids who aren't picked for GT programs at a young age tend to give up, thinking themselves as "less intelligent". Look it up, smarty pants!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So my 3rd grade DD in AAP came home today and said that she had the distinct pleasure (not) of getting yelled at by this much larger 6th grade boy in the AAP program who is a safety patrol on the bus. He was mad at them because he heard them discussing the differences between AAP and GenEd classes with another 3rd grader.

She was really upset because the boy wasn't part of the conversation, but interrupted them. The girl in the GenEd class had been telling them repeatedly that there was no difference between GenEd classes and AAP classes and that she was just as smart as they were, if not smarter. When they explained that the AAP classes are for the more academically advanced kids, the boy ordered them to stop talking and "bullying" the other girl.

My DD is just a 3rd grader, and she'd never had such a discussion with another student before, and she certainly never had been loudly reprimanded by a 6th grade patrol leader before. Now she is scared of the boy and doesn't want to get on the bus again. She wanted to know if he was going to report her to school administrators and why she did anything wrong telling the GenEd student that the more advanced kids had been selected for AAP.

Parents of GenEd kids: please stop telling your kids they are "just as smart" as the others. They will parrot this BS back, even if you think they won't, just leading to arguments that aren't very productive.

School counselors: if you happen to be reading this, please sit down with the GenEd classes at your school and make sure these kids know that there is nothing wrong about being in either a GenEd or an AAP class. And please ask the administration to remind safety patrols that they are there to help maintain order, not take sides on behalf of GenEd students or police what younger children say to one another about how kids are selected for AAP.

FCPS: please don't bend to the pressure to do away with centers or drastically cut back AAP admittance. You would be doing our communities a disservice by pretending that all the kids have exactly the same academic needs or abilities.

OP here. So many things to address here, where to start... First of all, in your entirely unimaginative copy and paste effort, you changed a few key points, bolded above. In the scenario that actually happened, the two girls weren't having a lovely discussion about "the differences between AAP and Gen Ed classes". Nice try, but these two girls were telling the third girl that she wasn't smart enough to be in AAP. Nothing nice about that. They didn't sweetly "explain that the AAP classes are for the more academically advanced classes". If you don't categorize that as bullying, then quite frankly, there is something wrong with you.

And yes, safety patrols are there to "help maintain order". Seeing two kids picking on another and intervening on behalf of the child being bullied is maintaining order. That's one of the things they're taught to do. If the kids had been picking on a child for any other reason, the safety patrols would hopefully have intervened in much the same way. Hopefully it's not your kid being treated this way one of these days. It would be such a shame if the patrol chose to ignore what was going on, wouldn't it? And I'm sure you'd march on down to the school to make the case that someone should have done something.

Again, you weren't there. Unless, of course, you're just the author of a fiction, in which case you can supply however many additional details you'd like and I apologize for not having bought the Cliff Notes sooner.

I don't think it's "bullying" for AAP kids to tell another kid she isn't "smart enough" to be in AAP. I wouldn't necessarily agree with it - AAP testing measures only certain abilities at a particular point in time - but I totally reject your rather transparent effort to create and/or massage a narrative simply because you don't like the fact that FCPS has determined that some kids, and not others, are eligible for AAP programs.

And, if an older patrol told a younger student to stop "bullying" another student in this scenario AND I was the parent of that student AND she felt intimidated by the older student as a result, I might very well march down to the school to complain about the older student's (i.e., your son's) behavior. He can certainly suggest that other kids should be kind to one another, but if he thinks it's his job to boss around younger kids and enforce his own (or, more accurately, your) rules of social interactions, we might have a problem.

You have got to be kidding. You do know that patrols are almost always 6th graders, sometimes 5th? And that they are supposed to intervene when they see someone being picked on? So now it is YOU who sounds like the overprotective helicopter parent, swooping in to protect your snowflake from that big, nasty patrol who was smart enough to pick up on snowflake's nastiness. If I were the parent of one of those girls, and found out that they had been reported and/or reprimanded for this type of behavior, I would be very ashamed and upset to learn that my DD had actually told another child she "wasn't smart". What a truly mean thing to say. I'd be grateful to that patrol for bringing it to my attention and you can bet I'd make sure this kid never spoke that way to anyone again.

It's hysterical how you are the one "massaging this narrative" to spin your own fiction of the "big, mean 6th grade patrol who overstepped his boundaries".

I'm sorry you've become hysterical when someone points out that the OP may be spinning a situation that may or may not have actually occurred for rhetorical purposes. I mean, it's not like she was actually there. I don't know why I can't come up with a competing narrative in which an older GenEd boy goes on off a sixth-grade power trip and tries to intimidate younger girls into silence because he happens to sympathize with one of their classmates. In doing so, I didn't try to bad-mouth all GenEd kids, which can't be said for OP with respect to AAP kids.

By the way, going back to the OP's post, I don't see her claiming that the Mean AAP Girls told the Innocent GenEd Girl she wasn't "smart," but only that they were "smarter" than she was since they got into AAP, and she did not. Like it or not, FCPS determined there was a basis to differentiate among the three girls, and sticking our collective heads in the sand isn't going to change that.

Wow, you are really a piece of work. Picking apart the phrasing to make it somehow more palatable? It's ok to tell another child this? You are a living example of what is wrong here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Exactly. Enough with the Manichean novellas where the AAP kids are always the villains.

No. In many cases they are the victims. When they don't get into TJ, they consider themselves failures.

And this makes them "victims"? Of what, exactly? Believing their own hype?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So my 3rd grade DD in AAP came home today and said that she had the distinct pleasure (not) of getting yelled at by this much larger 6th grade boy in the AAP program who is a safety patrol on the bus. He was mad at them because he heard them discussing the differences between AAP and GenEd classes with another 3rd grader.

She was really upset because the boy wasn't part of the conversation, but interrupted them. The girl in the GenEd class had been telling them repeatedly that there was no difference between GenEd classes and AAP classes and that she was just as smart as they were, if not smarter. When they explained that the AAP classes are for the more academically advanced kids, the boy ordered them to stop talking and "bullying" the other girl.

My DD is just a 3rd grader, and she'd never had such a discussion with another student before, and she certainly never had been loudly reprimanded by a 6th grade patrol leader before. Now she is scared of the boy and doesn't want to get on the bus again. She wanted to know if he was going to report her to school administrators and why she did anything wrong telling the GenEd student that the more advanced kids had been selected for AAP.

Parents of GenEd kids: please stop telling your kids they are "just as smart" as the others. They will parrot this BS back, even if you think they won't, just leading to arguments that aren't very productive.

School counselors: if you happen to be reading this, please sit down with the GenEd classes at your school and make sure these kids know that there is nothing wrong about being in either a GenEd or an AAP class. And please ask the administration to remind safety patrols that they are there to help maintain order, not take sides on behalf of GenEd students or police what younger children say to one another about how kids are selected for AAP.

FCPS: please don't bend to the pressure to do away with centers or drastically cut back AAP admittance. You would be doing our communities a disservice by pretending that all the kids have exactly the same academic needs or abilities.

OP here. So many things to address here, where to start... First of all, in your entirely unimaginative copy and paste effort, you changed a few key points, bolded above. In the scenario that actually happened, the two girls weren't having a lovely discussion about "the differences between AAP and Gen Ed classes". Nice try, but these two girls were telling the third girl that she wasn't smart enough to be in AAP. Nothing nice about that. They didn't sweetly "explain that the AAP classes are for the more academically advanced classes". If you don't categorize that as bullying, then quite frankly, there is something wrong with you.

And yes, safety patrols are there to "help maintain order". Seeing two kids picking on another and intervening on behalf of the child being bullied is maintaining order. That's one of the things they're taught to do. If the kids had been picking on a child for any other reason, the safety patrols would hopefully have intervened in much the same way. Hopefully it's not your kid being treated this way one of these days. It would be such a shame if the patrol chose to ignore what was going on, wouldn't it? And I'm sure you'd march on down to the school to make the case that someone should have done something.

Again, you weren't there. Unless, of course, you're just the author of a fiction, in which case you can supply however many additional details you'd like and I apologize for not having bought the Cliff Notes sooner.

I don't think it's "bullying" for AAP kids to tell another kid she isn't "smart enough" to be in AAP. I wouldn't necessarily agree with it - AAP testing measures only certain abilities at a particular point in time - but I totally reject your rather transparent effort to create and/or massage a narrative simply because you don't like the fact that FCPS has determined that some kids, and not others, are eligible for AAP programs.

And, if an older patrol told a younger student to stop "bullying" another student in this scenario AND I was the parent of that student AND she felt intimidated by the older student as a result, I might very well march down to the school to complain about the older student's (i.e., your son's) behavior. He can certainly suggest that other kids should be kind to one another, but if he thinks it's his job to boss around younger kids and enforce his own (or, more accurately, your) rules of social interactions, we might have a problem.

You have got to be kidding. You do know that patrols are almost always 6th graders, sometimes 5th? And that they are supposed to intervene when they see someone being picked on? So now it is YOU who sounds like the overprotective helicopter parent, swooping in to protect your snowflake from that big, nasty patrol who was smart enough to pick up on snowflake's nastiness. If I were the parent of one of those girls, and found out that they had been reported and/or reprimanded for this type of behavior, I would be very ashamed and upset to learn that my DD had actually told another child she "wasn't smart". What a truly mean thing to say. I'd be grateful to that patrol for bringing it to my attention and you can bet I'd make sure this kid never spoke that way to anyone again.

It's hysterical how you are the one "massaging this narrative" to spin your own fiction of the "big, mean 6th grade patrol who overstepped his boundaries".

I'm sorry you've become hysterical when someone points out that the OP may be spinning a situation that may or may not have actually occurred for rhetorical purposes. I mean, it's not like she was actually there. I don't know why I can't come up with a competing narrative in which an older GenEd boy goes on off a sixth-grade power trip and tries to intimidate younger girls into silence because he happens to sympathize with one of their classmates. In doing so, I didn't try to bad-mouth all GenEd kids, which can't be said for OP with respect to AAP kids.

By the way, going back to the OP's post, I don't see her claiming that the Mean AAP Girls told the Innocent GenEd Girl she wasn't "smart," but only that they were "smarter" than she was since they got into AAP, and she did not. Like it or not, FCPS determined there was a basis to differentiate among the three girls, and sticking our collective heads in the sand isn't going to change that.

Wow, you are really a piece of work. Picking apart the phrasing to make it somehow more palatable? It's ok to tell another child this? You are a living example of what is wrong here.

I was responding to your mischaracterization of a conversation that the OP purports to be describing, even though she wasn't actually there, and which may or may not have even happened. The stakes would be higher in my book if the evidence was less flimsy and the biases less obvious.

I'm far more worried about the helicopter parents who embue such fleeting exchanges between young children with more significance than they warrant, and thereby impress upon their kids that it really is a big deal (when in fact no one much remembers who was in AAP, or who was Miss AAP Bossy Pants as a third grader, in a few years).

The OP's obvious resentment and dislike of all AAP children is the only thing that's clear to me from the whole thread.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Patrols or any other student should report bullying. This behavior is bullying to this girl and will lower her self esteem.

It's hard to see this below, but here is a link to a great presentation at my school on bullying in FCPS.

http://www.fcps.edu/ForestvilleES/2012-13_Events/Forestville%20Parent%20PPT%20revised%20%20July%202012.pdf

I omitted the garbled part, but (1) staff responsibilities, which is what were excerpted, surely are not assumed by safety patrols; and (2) this purported discussion clearly would not fall within the SR&R definition of bullying, in my view.

If you read what I linked to, you would see that everyone is responsible for stopping bullying - staff, students who see bullying, and the student being bullied. I don't think you even read it at all.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Patrols or any other student should report bullying. This behavior is bullying to this girl and will lower her self esteem.

It's hard to see this below, but here is a link to a great presentation at my school on bullying in FCPS.

http://www.fcps.edu/ForestvilleES/2012-13_Events/Forestville%20Parent%20PPT%20revised%20%20July%202012.pdf

I omitted the garbled part, but (1) staff responsibilities, which is what were excerpted, surely are not assumed by safety patrols; and (2) this purported discussion clearly would not fall within the SR&R definition of bullying, in my view.

If you read what I linked to, you would see that everyone is responsible for stopping bullying - staff, students who see bullying, and the student being bullied. I don't think you even read it at all.

I was referring to the portion of the deck that you'd tried to excerpt, which appeared to relate to staff responsibilities. However, the way you presented it was so garbled that it was hard to read.

And the specific incident teed up for discussion does not, in my opinion, fall within either the SR&R or FCPS Training definitions of "bullying." If you believe otherwise, you apparently think any discussion among children about why some don't get into AAP is tantamount to "psychological harassment."

Ill-mannered behavior on the part of the girls in our hypothetical scenario? Probably. Bullying? I think not.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Patrols or any other student should report bullying. This behavior is bullying to this girl and will lower her self esteem.

It's hard to see this below, but here is a link to a great presentation at my school on bullying in FCPS.

http://www.fcps.edu/ForestvilleES/2012-13_Events/Forestville%20Parent%20PPT%20revised%20%20July%202012.pdf

I omitted the garbled part, but (1) staff responsibilities, which is what were excerpted, surely are not assumed by safety patrols; and (2) this purported discussion clearly would not fall within the SR&R definition of bullying, in my view.

If you read what I linked to, you would see that everyone is responsible for stopping bullying - staff, students who see bullying, and the student being bullied. I don't think you even read it at all.

I was referring to the portion of the deck that you'd tried to excerpt, which appeared to relate to staff responsibilities. However, the way you presented it was so garbled that it was hard to read.

And the specific incident teed up for discussion does not, in my opinion, fall within either the SR&R or FCPS Training definitions of "bullying." If you believe otherwise, you apparently think any discussion among children about why some don't get into AAP is tantamount to "psychological harassment."

Ill-mannered behavior on the part of the girls in our hypothetical scenario? Probably. Bullying? I think not.

Not pp. Patrols are allowed to address I'll-mannered behavior, not just bullying. If you don't like it that I'll-mannered behavior isn't tolerated on a public school bus, maybe do kiss and ride. It is insane what people will try to justify. Maybe the patrol should have just reported the girls to the principal since I would think she/he has the authority to address I'll-mannered behavior. I'm sure the same people complaining about the patrol just telling them to stop would be asking why he didn't just tell them to stop instead of making a big deal and reporting it to the principal.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Patrols or any other student should report bullying. This behavior is bullying to this girl and will lower her self esteem.

It's hard to see this below, but here is a link to a great presentation at my school on bullying in FCPS.

http://www.fcps.edu/ForestvilleES/2012-13_Events/Forestville%20Parent%20PPT%20revised%20%20July%202012.pdf

I omitted the garbled part, but (1) staff responsibilities, which is what were excerpted, surely are not assumed by safety patrols; and (2) this purported discussion clearly would not fall within the SR&R definition of bullying, in my view.

If you read what I linked to, you would see that everyone is responsible for stopping bullying - staff, students who see bullying, and the student being bullied. I don't think you even read it at all.

Uh-oh. DCUM hates victim blaming or the appearance of victim blaming.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Patrols or any other student should report bullying. This behavior is bullying to this girl and will lower her self esteem.

It's hard to see this below, but here is a link to a great presentation at my school on bullying in FCPS.

http://www.fcps.edu/ForestvilleES/2012-13_Events/Forestville%20Parent%20PPT%20revised%20%20July%202012.pdf

I omitted the garbled part, but (1) staff responsibilities, which is what were excerpted, surely are not assumed by safety patrols; and (2) this purported discussion clearly would not fall within the SR&R definition of bullying, in my view.

If you read what I linked to, you would see that everyone is responsible for stopping bullying - staff, students who see bullying, and the student being bullied. I don't think you even read it at all.

I was referring to the portion of the deck that you'd tried to excerpt, which appeared to relate to staff responsibilities. However, the way you presented it was so garbled that it was hard to read.

And the specific incident teed up for discussion does not, in my opinion, fall within either the SR&R or FCPS Training definitions of "bullying." If you believe otherwise, you apparently think any discussion among children about why some don't get into AAP is tantamount to "psychological harassment."

Ill-mannered behavior on the part of the girls in our hypothetical scenario? Probably. Bullying? I think not.

Not pp. Patrols are allowed to address I'll-mannered behavior, not just bullying. If you don't like it that I'll-mannered behavior isn't tolerated on a public school bus, maybe do kiss and ride. It is insane what people will try to justify. Maybe the patrol should have just reported the girls to the principal since I would think she/he has the authority to address I'll-mannered behavior. I'm sure the same people complaining about the patrol just telling them to stop would be asking why he didn't just tell them to stop instead of making a big deal and reporting it to the principal.

Exactly my reaction, watching people step up here to defend the comments of the OP who called AAP kids, as a group, "insufferable."

If the patrol said something like "be nice to each other, girls," on the bus, no problem. But if some older boy decides that, because someone gave him a florescent belt to wear, he gets to decide what much younger kids have to say to each other about who does or doesn't get into AAP, he's mistaken. Sorry.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Patrols or any other student should report bullying. This behavior is bullying to this girl and will lower her self esteem.

It's hard to see this below, but here is a link to a great presentation at my school on bullying in FCPS.

http://www.fcps.edu/ForestvilleES/2012-13_Events/Forestville%20Parent%20PPT%20revised%20%20July%202012.pdf

I omitted the garbled part, but (1) staff responsibilities, which is what were excerpted, surely are not assumed by safety patrols; and (2) this purported discussion clearly would not fall within the SR&R definition of bullying, in my view.

If you read what I linked to, you would see that everyone is responsible for stopping bullying - staff, students who see bullying, and the student being bullied. I don't think you even read it at all.

I was referring to the portion of the deck that you'd tried to excerpt, which appeared to relate to staff responsibilities. However, the way you presented it was so garbled that it was hard to read.

And the specific incident teed up for discussion does not, in my opinion, fall within either the SR&R or FCPS Training definitions of "bullying." If you believe otherwise, you apparently think any discussion among children about why some don't get into AAP is tantamount to "psychological harassment."

Ill-mannered behavior on the part of the girls in our hypothetical scenario? Probably. Bullying? I think not.

Not pp. Patrols are allowed to address I'll-mannered behavior, not just bullying. If you don't like it that I'll-mannered behavior isn't tolerated on a public school bus, maybe do kiss and ride. It is insane what people will try to justify. Maybe the patrol should have just reported the girls to the principal since I would think she/he has the authority to address I'll-mannered behavior. I'm sure the same people complaining about the patrol just telling them to stop would be asking why he didn't just tell them to stop instead of making a big deal and reporting it to the principal.

Exactly my reaction, watching people step up here to defend the comments of the OP who called AAP kids, as a group, "insufferable."

If the patrol said something like "be nice to each other, girls," on the bus, no problem. But if some older boy decides that, because someone gave him a florescent belt to wear, he gets to decide what much younger kids have to say to each other about who does or doesn't get into AAP, he's mistaken. Sorry.

Where do you see posts defending OP calling AAP kids insufferable? My kid is in AAP and I disagree with OP on that point, but telling an 8 year old she's not smart or not smart enough isn't ok. I think it was appropriate for the patrol to step in. Judging from the responses on this thread, I can see why the two girls thought it was perfectly fine to tell the little girl she's not smart.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Patrols or any other student should report bullying. This behavior is bullying to this girl and will lower her self esteem.

It's hard to see this below, but here is a link to a great presentation at my school on bullying in FCPS.

http://www.fcps.edu/ForestvilleES/2012-13_Events/Forestville%20Parent%20PPT%20revised%20%20July%202012.pdf

I omitted the garbled part, but (1) staff responsibilities, which is what were excerpted, surely are not assumed by safety patrols; and (2) this purported discussion clearly would not fall within the SR&R definition of bullying, in my view.

If you read what I linked to, you would see that everyone is responsible for stopping bullying - staff, students who see bullying, and the student being bullied. I don't think you even read it at all.

I was referring to the portion of the deck that you'd tried to excerpt, which appeared to relate to staff responsibilities. However, the way you presented it was so garbled that it was hard to read.

And the specific incident teed up for discussion does not, in my opinion, fall within either the SR&R or FCPS Training definitions of "bullying." If you believe otherwise, you apparently think any discussion among children about why some don't get into AAP is tantamount to "psychological harassment."

Ill-mannered behavior on the part of the girls in our hypothetical scenario? Probably. Bullying? I think not.

Not pp. Patrols are allowed to address I'll-mannered behavior, not just bullying. If you don't like it that I'll-mannered behavior isn't tolerated on a public school bus, maybe do kiss and ride. It is insane what people will try to justify. Maybe the patrol should have just reported the girls to the principal since I would think she/he has the authority to address I'll-mannered behavior. I'm sure the same people complaining about the patrol just telling them to stop would be asking why he didn't just tell them to stop instead of making a big deal and reporting it to the principal.

Exactly my reaction, watching people step up here to defend the comments of the OP who called AAP kids, as a group, "insufferable."

If the patrol said something like "be nice to each other, girls," on the bus, no problem. But if some older boy decides that, because someone gave him a florescent belt to wear, he gets to decide what much younger kids have to say to each other about who does or doesn't get into AAP, he's mistaken. Sorry.

Where do you see posts defending OP calling AAP kids insufferable? My kid is in AAP and I disagree with OP on that point, but telling an 8 year old she's not smart or not smart enough isn't ok. I think it was appropriate for the patrol to step in. Judging from the responses on this thread, I can see why the two girls thought it was perfectly fine to tell the little girl she's not smart.

Read the OP. As relayed second-hand by the OP, they (also little girls, by the way) didn't tell the girl she wasn't smart, but that they were "smarter" because they were in the AAP class.

Regularly telling someone else she is stupid is bullying, in my book. Claiming they were "smarter" because they got a higher score on a test that led to their being assigned to an AAP class is bragging. Is the patrol going to step in and demand a halt to a conversation every time kids brag about themselves or compare themselves to others? Maybe he needs more than a patrol belt if that's the plan.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Patrols or any other student should report bullying. This behavior is bullying to this girl and will lower her self esteem.

It's hard to see this below, but here is a link to a great presentation at my school on bullying in FCPS.

http://www.fcps.edu/ForestvilleES/2012-13_Events/Forestville%20Parent%20PPT%20revised%20%20July%202012.pdf

I omitted the garbled part, but (1) staff responsibilities, which is what were excerpted, surely are not assumed by safety patrols; and (2) this purported discussion clearly would not fall within the SR&R definition of bullying, in my view.

If you read what I linked to, you would see that everyone is responsible for stopping bullying - staff, students who see bullying, and the student being bullied. I don't think you even read it at all.

I was referring to the portion of the deck that you'd tried to excerpt, which appeared to relate to staff responsibilities. However, the way you presented it was so garbled that it was hard to read.

And the specific incident teed up for discussion does not, in my opinion, fall within either the SR&R or FCPS Training definitions of "bullying." If you believe otherwise, you apparently think any discussion among children about why some don't get into AAP is tantamount to "psychological harassment."

Ill-mannered behavior on the part of the girls in our hypothetical scenario? Probably. Bullying? I think not.

Not pp. Patrols are allowed to address I'll-mannered behavior, not just bullying. If you don't like it that I'll-mannered behavior isn't tolerated on a public school bus, maybe do kiss and ride. It is insane what people will try to justify. Maybe the patrol should have just reported the girls to the principal since I would think she/he has the authority to address I'll-mannered behavior. I'm sure the same people complaining about the patrol just telling them to stop would be asking why he didn't just tell them to stop instead of making a big deal and reporting it to the principal.

Exactly my reaction, watching people step up here to defend the comments of the OP who called AAP kids, as a group, "insufferable."

If the patrol said something like "be nice to each other, girls," on the bus, no problem. But if some older boy decides that, because someone gave him a florescent belt to wear, he gets to decide what much younger kids have to say to each other about who does or doesn't get into AAP, he's mistaken. Sorry.

It's so interesting to imagine the day when your snowflake is made fun of on the bus, or elsewhere, and no one steps in to defend him or her. Let's say you have a daughter and other kids tell her she's "not pretty enough" to be in their club. Or your son is told he's a wimp so he can't play with the other boys. I guess in these scenarios, it's perfectly fine with you if a nearby patrol who witnesses these conversations just completely ignores what's going on. I'm also imagining your outrage when your crushed son or daughter comes home in tears and tells you what happened. Only then will it hit you that yes, this type of behavior is bullying. It's easy to dismiss the whole situation when it's someone else's kid, isn't it?

[Anonymous]

Think OP got it right in the title: these kids are "clueless."
Far cry from "bullying" though; unless that means any comment that potentially hurts someone's feelings.