Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

After all, how would any of us feel if our employer forced us to do volunteer work at his/her approved list of charities in order to qualify for a promotion. It wouldn't be accepted in the workplace, why should it be accepted in our schools?

There are actually a lot of differences between students' legal rights in schools and employee's legal rights in the workplace.

It was meant as a "food for thought" and is worth thinking about. Not meant as an apples to apples "legal rights" comparison.

Try this OP - TONS of opportunities in Montgomery County. These are all SSL approved.

(Frankly, I did the community service club in HS and it was the most rewarding thing I did. I agree with you that it shouldn't be forced upon kids, but I think it should be strongly encouraged. My best experiences were through volunteering.)

https://volunteer.truist.com/mcvc/volunteer/search-2?js_p=1&target=&__form_submitted__=_volunteer_search_aspx_2&__init_request__=_volunteer_search_aspx_2&__form_submitted__=_volunteer_search_aspx_3&__init_request__=_volunteer_search_aspx_3&keyword=&city=&zip=&radius=0&one_time_p=&__form_submitted__=_volunteer_search_aspx_1&__init_request__=_volunteer_search_aspx_1&medallions=10472591673&x=66&y=21

There is something very dangerous/frightening about so many parents accepting this and defending this practice. Talk about a slippery slope to state control!

What happens when, for example, the list one day only includes groups with a particular religious or political affiliation. Sometimes you need to look at the principal at stake. I can't be the only liberal on this board, can I?

I think it's great.

Methinks OP's kid is graduating soon and doesn't have enough hours. lol

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't know. How is it legal to require your kid to take math? Gym? English?

Same thing. It's service learning for a reason.

Not the same thing. These "approved" organizations are getting a tangible, measurable financial benefit from the students: the unpaid labor. The students are forced to provide if they want to graduate. Furthermore, these SSL hours happen outside of school hours. Some students need that time to work, help their families, etc. Very different from requiring math, english (during school hours) which are for the benefit of the child and are an essential function of school.

Learning about service might be a laudable goal, but forced volunteerism seems a bridge too far (at least). Parents can teach service and volunteerism but the school shouldn't force it.


After all, how would any of us feel if our employer forced us to do volunteer work at his/her approved list of charities in order to qualify for a promotion. It wouldn't be accepted in the workplace, why should it be accepted in our schools?

If only so they don't grow up to think like you. Disgusting.

They can also be accomplished starting right after 5th grade before kids are working.

If your student participates in a lot of after school clubs (which is offered for free to students) - that will also count towards SSL hours. Things like recycling club etc. Helping in the school office, media center, in printing PTA pamphlets etc - all these things count towards SSL hours. 75 hours over, 7 years is not a hardship to accomplish.

It actually helps the poorest students to have a resume of work ready for their college application. They can show participation in extra-curricular activities.

Students have options for SSL hours within the school day. Shelving books in the library, helping a teacher over lunch to name two.

Anonymous wrote:

After all, how would any of us feel if our employer forced us to do volunteer work at his/her approved list of charities in order to qualify for a promotion. It wouldn't be accepted in the workplace, why should it be accepted in our schools?

There are actually a lot of differences between students' legal rights in schools and employee's legal rights in the workplace.

Anonymous wrote:is babysitting, not considered something that could be counted towards service?

No. It must be an approved organization. The county provides a list or if you want something else, the organization can seek approval. But babysitting is not going to satisfy the requirement.

Anonymous wrote:I don't know. How is it legal to require your kid to take math? Gym? English?

Same thing. It's service learning for a reason.

Not the same thing. These "approved" organizations are getting a tangible, measurable financial benefit from the students: the unpaid labor. The students are forced to provide if they want to graduate. Furthermore, these SSL hours happen outside of school hours. Some students need that time to work, help their families, etc. Very different from requiring math, english (during school hours) which are for the benefit of the child and are an essential function of school.

Learning about service might be a laudable goal, but forced volunteerism seems a bridge too far (at least). Parents can teach service and volunteerism but the school shouldn't force it.


After all, how would any of us feel if our employer forced us to do volunteer work at his/her approved list of charities in order to qualify for a promotion. It wouldn't be accepted in the workplace, why should it be accepted in our schools?

is babysitting, not considered something that could be counted towards service?

I don't know. How is it legal to require your kid to take math? Gym? English?

Same thing. It's service learning for a reason.

How is it legal to require SSL hours in order to graduate from a public school?? I genuinely do not understand how this has not been challenged legally. I disagree so strongly with this program. Don't get me wrong - I think genuine volunteerism is admirable. Forced volunteerism, however, is crass b/c is it not genuine. In addition, what about lower income kids who might need to use out-of-school-time to work, babysit a sibling while mom works, etc.

This program really rubs me the wrong way. It is "state" (in this case the public school system) coercing underage and unpaid work at organizations it deems "worthy." Yuck.