Leaving Cert term ends early after dance incident

Copper_pipe

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2012/0519/1224316360979.html?fb_ref=.T7ewx6q12Ng.like&fb_source=timeline

THREE LEAVING Cert students at a well-known fee-paying school in Dublin have been told that they are expelled after a dance music event at the school.

The three students of High School, Rathgar are due to sit their Leaving Cert in two weeks’ time – but they have told by the school authorities that they must now find an alternative exam centre.

Last night, the school authorities sent a text to sixth-year parents informing them the planned graduation had been cancelled.

The school or the principal could not be contacted for comment last night.

Parents received a text from the principal to say that the sixth-form lessons had concluded. Parents were very annoyed last night at the upset caused to the students so close to their exams.

“In view of the serious and repeated breaches of the privacy policy . . . sixth form lessons have been concluded today and there will be no end-of-term celebrations,” the text read.

The message said pupils could only return to school before the exams “by appointment”. There were only 2½ days of classes remaining for the students.

There were suggestions that there had been some “fun slagging” of teachers on Facebook but it was not particularly vicious. A parent said the ending of sixth year was due to the dance event but social networking was being used as the reason.

The students are alleged to have been involved in a dance music event, which took place in a common room reserved for sixth years at the school.

The event was believed to have lasted an hour. During it, the room in question was padlocked. When the school authorities intervened, there were what one source calls some “exchanges” between senior figures in the school and some students. It appears the school authorities took exception to remarks made by students towards one teacher.

One parent said that there was no drink or drugs during the event and other students were allowed to leave through the window.

The parents of the three students have already lodged an appeal against the apparent expulsions. The appeal is being taken under Section 29 of the Education Act.

High School is one of the leading fee-paying schools in the State. It features strongly in the annual Irish Times school league tables, which track progression of Leaving Cert students to third level.

Education sources expressed surprise that the students in question had been informed of their expulsion.

Generally, students are suspended for 20 days before their expulsion is formally ratified by a school board of management.

This was the case earlier this week when the board of management at the Oatlands College in Stillorgan, south Dublin, moved to expel four students after they had served a 20-day suspension. The four had been accused of posting abusive remarks on Facebook.

Harsh in my opinion

mikemac1

sixth form?

Have we moved to the UK?

MagicMarker

Copper_pipe wrote: »

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2012/0519/1224316360979.html?fb_ref=.T7ewx6q12Ng.like&fb_source=timeline



Harsh in my opinion

Considering we don't know why they were expelled, we can hardly say it's harsh can we?

Nodin

You'd have to know what was said before commenting, really.

aaronjumper

"The students are alleged to have been involved in a dance music event, which took place in a common room reserved for sixth years at the school.

The event was believed to have lasted an hour. During it, the room in question was padlocked. When the school authorities intervened, there were what one source calls some “exchanges” between senior figures in the school and some students. It appears the school authorities took exception to remarks made by students towards one teacher.

One parent said that there was no drink or drugs during the event and other students were allowed to leave through the window.

The parents of the three students have already lodged an appeal against the apparent expulsions. The appeal is being taken under Section 29 of the Education Act."

Apparently that's why.

MagicMarker

aaronjumper wrote: »

"The students are alleged to have been involved in a dance music event, which took place in a common room reserved for sixth years at the school.

The event was believed to have lasted an hour. During it, the room in question was padlocked. When the school authorities intervened, there were what one source calls some “exchanges” between senior figures in the school and some students. It appears the school authorities took exception to remarks made by students towards one teacher.

One parent said that there was no drink or drugs during the event and other students were allowed to leave through the window.

The parents of the three students have already lodged an appeal against the apparent expulsions. The appeal is being taken under Section 29 of the Education Act."

Apparently that's why.

No, that's not apparent at all actually.

Corruptedmorals

To call off the grad and seriously hinder their chances of actually doing the leaving cert that they have paid for is a bit much. Should have just banned the ringleaders from the grad and suspended them from classtime remaining.

Also..dance 'event'. Some tunes in a locked classroom?

kevohmsford

Teachers must have been disappointed that they were not invited.

Naomi00

'High School', 'Sixth Form','Common Room'...



Where do they think they are?

Shryke

They're kids. It's way too harsh considering the effect it might have on their futures at this junction. They'd have to give some awful abuse to deserve that kind of treatment. Maybe they did though? Who knows.

2 stroke

The fact that the room was padlocked is a serious issue, no fire escapes

aaronjumper

MagicMarker wrote: »

No, that's not apparent at all actually.

Well according to the above source it's one of the reasons.

Eathrin

kevohmsford wrote: »

Teachers must have been disappointed that they were not invited.

Well something was going on!

During it, the room in question was padlocked. When the school authorities intervened, there were what one source calls some “exchanges” between senior figures in the school and some students.

Copper_pipe

I know some people who go to the school and just sent them a text there, i got back a reply but would rather not say it, but il PM if anyone wants it,

christmas2012

excessive punishment i think they could have got a suspension,(usually that would be a good enough warning before an outright expulsion)..

MagicMarker

Copper_pipe wrote: »

I know some people who go to the school and just sent them a text there, i got back a reply but would rather not say it, but il PM if anyone wants it,

Just tell us ffs.

goat2

it is a fee paying school, then you would think that they would just look for apoligies right now and move on, these students are worried enough about exams and getting on, as someone here said, it started with a bit of dancing, no booze, they were young people letting off a bit of steam in the middle of a tense time for them, it was a way of unwinding.
the parents are paying and have been paying all these years and now when it is crucial they stop it,
what could have been said of a teacher for this to happen

Eathrin

Copper_pipe wrote: »

I know some people who go to the school and just sent them a text there, i got back a reply but would rather not say it, but il PM if anyone wants it,

If it's worth Pm'ing, go on!

Copper_pipe

Here it is,
there year had a rave in the common room locked the doors blacked out the windows raved for an hour flooded the room
then one threw an orange at our jewish duputy pirncipal and called him a jew
then the other one was being cheeky and rude when being interviewed
the other one did something on facebook

Logical Fallacy

Copper_pipe wrote: »

Here it is,
there year had a rave in the common room locked the doors blacked out the windows raved for an hour flooded the room
then one threw an orange at our jewish duputy pirncipal and called him a jew
then the other one was being cheeky and rude when being interviewed
the other one did something on facebook

lol, Orange Jews.

Nodin

If its true - Unless they've previously established a "zero tolerance" approach to that kind of incident, or this is the latest in a lomng of bullshit, suspension, or being banned from some function or other would strike me as more suitable for that sort of crap.

Nodin

goat2 wrote: »

it is a fee paying school, then you would think that they would just look for apoligies right now and move on, these students are worried enough about exams and getting on, as someone here said, it started with a bit of dancing, no booze, they were young people letting off a bit of steam in the middle of a tense time for them, it was a way of unwinding.
the parents are paying and have been paying all these years and now when it is crucial they stop it,
what could have been said of a teacher for this to happen

Paying money for an education isn't a licence to abuse the "little people" who constitute the staff.

Kurooi

The source is questionable and so are the statements, the school is under threat from the public and is being complained against over this, of course they will not give any actual information!

It is not in the interest of either the school or the parents to let people know why that happened, all information is likely to be well made up and biased.

southcentralts

this dance event seems a bit tame, we would go into a prefab classroom in our tech and have a rumble (beat the **** out of each other with chairs before walking out, or limping) got caught once and got a detention. tech-life

goat2

Nodin wrote: »

Paying money for an education isn't a licence to abuse the "little people" who constitute the staff.

it is very important that students respect teachers, and that teachers respect the students also,
i do take no notice of them leaving off steam and having a dance nor that the door was padlocked,
BUT


it was all wrong to bring up religion, these children must know nothing about history, i am sure that if they knew anything about what the jewish people went through in the past, they would have great respect for them rather than this kind of behaviour,
there are brilliant films depicting their history, which would give these children great ensight into the past.


i take a serious view of that, as i have respect for all, does not matter what religion a person is to me, once they respect me, i respect them

Feeona

Copper_pipe wrote: »

there year had a rave in the common room locked the doors blacked out the windows raved for an hour flooded the room

I can imagine the panic of the staff when they realised the students had locked themselves in. All well and good unless someone got hurt, then the school would've been sued for not taking due care so I don't understand the stance one parent has taken by pointing out there were no drugs/drink involved, and students could get out via a window. If something had happened to one of the students, the fact that no drink/drugs were involved would be of little interest to any parent.

Cheekiness and talking back etc is just part of the job for many teachers, so I can't understand three students being expelled especially without following proper procedure.

Herb Powell

Logical Fallacy wrote: »

lol, Orange Jews.

Concentrated or pressed?

some random drunk

Naomi00 wrote: »

'High School', 'Sixth Form','Common Room'...



Where do they think they are?

In fairness that school's name is "The High School", rather than it being referred to as a high school.
I don't find the term "common room" odd, my school had one for sixth years and so did my friend's school.
Agreed that "sixth form" is strange when referring to an Irish school though.

uriah

Shryke wrote: »

They're kids. It's way too harsh considering the effect it might have on their futures at this junction. They'd have to give some awful abuse to deserve that kind of treatment. Maybe they did though? Who knows.

Really?
Eighteen year-old kids? They're old enough to vote, to be sexually active, to get married, and you think they're kids?

Strange how the 'they're only kids' plea is trotted out when they behave appallingly, whereas when they want to indulge in adult pursuits, we argue that they are old enough, and they're doing it anyway.

Teachers should not have to endure any such abuse from these 'adults' (or from children either) And it is time some people in this society stopped trying to excuse this behaviour. It is not in the interests of our youth that such behaviour should be accepted or excused.

In which other section of society would workers be expected to take such abuse, and in which other area of society would people be excused from treating workers in an abusive fashion?

Is it any wonder our young emigrants are causing such problems abroad?
We are not teaching them how to behave in an acceptable fashion, so it is falling on the police force in Australia and other countries to do it for us.

'Ah shure, they're only kids, and they're only messing'.

Logical Fallacy

Herb Powell wrote: »

Concentrated or pressed?

Freshly squeezed.

Biggins

I sort of look at it this way - like in a job with your employer...

* IF one was instead to throw an orange at a employer/boss - they certainly might have been fired - never mind any name calling.
* IF one was being cheeky and rude to boss/staff member when being interviewed, depending on the rudeness, certainly there might have been cause for a penalty to be metered out.
* IF a third then went home and posted something on Facebook (I'm guessing in bitchiness and/or having a further dig at the managers/staff?), then certainly besides liability issues, there might have been reason for penalties due to cyber-bullying alone.

Besides the possible locking of any room from inside (an insurance company alone would have a heart-attack), which was wrong (maybe on a lesser scale - maybe not?), the students were certainly all mature enough to know that they were doing something very wrong, something the people that were over the property would not have liked - that they went and covered up the window to hide their activities.

If it was JUST music and dancing, I'm suspecting that they might not just have bothered to cover the windows?
Maybe they also didn't want to be seen & caught smoking what ever? Thats just speculation however and a guess.

uriah

Copper_pipe wrote: »

Here it is,
there year had a rave in the common room locked the doors blacked out the windows raved for an hour flooded the room
then one threw an orange at our jewish duputy pirncipal and called him a jew
then the other one was being cheeky and rude when being interviewed
the other one did something on facebook

Criminal damage and assault for a start.

That should get them into court, resulting in a record that will keep them out of many countries.
I wonder if it was worth it?

Caiseoipe19

Biggins wrote: »

I sort of look at it this way - like in a job with your employer...

* IF one was instead to throw an orange at a employer/boss - they certainly might have been fired - never mind any name calling.
* IF one was being cheeky and rude to boss/staff member when being interviewed, depending on the rudeness, certainly there might have been cause for a penalty to be metered out.
* IF a third then went home and posted something on Facebook (I'm guessing in bitchiness and/or having a further dig at the managers/staff?), then certainly besides liability issues, there might have been reason for penalties due to cyber-bullying alone.

Besides the possible locking of any room from inside (an insurance company alone would have a heart-attack), which was wrong (maybe on a lesser scale - maybe not?), the students were certainly all mature enough to know that they were doing something very wrong, something the people that were over the property would not have liked - that they went and covered up the window to hide their activities.

If it was JUST music and dancing, I'm suspecting that they might not just have bothered to cover the windows?
Maybe they also didn't want to be seen & caught smoking what ever? Thats just speculation however and a guess.

Covering the windows I assumed was to block out the light for their "rave".

KyussBishop

School seems perfectly within rights to expel them really; they can still sit the Leaving Cert, they just need to do it at another exam center.

Biggins

Many years ago during the actual leaving exams were going on, three students let off a number of fire extinguishers about a CBS building.
As it was too late to stop them from taking their exams at the school, it was put down on their records that they were expelled in their final days.

(I'm guessing that the school, had they followed normal procedure anyway, would have expelled them, allowed an appeal and then acted after that - if there had been time. As it was, its just now on their record that they were expelled!)

byhookorbycrook

Being "on their record" doesn't really count for much, it's not like this is passed on to uni or employers or whatever.

girl in the striped socks

Copper_pipe wrote: »

I know some people who go to the school and just sent them a text there, i got back a reply but would rather not say it, but il PM if anyone wants it,

Go on so. Curiosity is getting the better of me.

Biggins

byhookorbycrook wrote: »

Being "on their record" doesn't really count for much, it's not like this is passed on to uni or employers or whatever.

I can't say myself. I don't know.
Maybe if they applied to a third level college later, it might have an effect?
Anyway, it was years ago - and trust me - the three lads were never going to third level anyway!

goat2

Nodin wrote: »

Paying money for an education isn't a licence to abuse the "little people" who constitute the staff.

that post of mine was expressed, before copper pipe let us knew what he/she knew in their post,
i fully agree that it is wrong to trow anything at anybody, let alone your superior, and to bring religion into it is not right, yes they should be repremanded

Milk & Honey

KyussBishop wrote: »

School seems perfectly within rights to expel them really; they can still sit the Leaving Cert, they just need to do it at another exam center.

I am not sure the school can stop them sitting the exam. Once the school offers itself as a centre they have to let any candidate who is registered there sit. There was an incident some years ago in Donegal when a school principal refused to admit students who were not in school uniform into an exam. he had to back down when the Dept. of Education got involved.
It happened to me when I was leaving school. Expelled and refused a reference. Sat the exams in the school and the lack of a reference was never a problem.

kfallon

They were having a 'rave' - are we back in 1994?

IM0

soft boys. having a rave in the school building. wtf

spurious

Milk & Honey wrote: »

I am not sure the school can stop them sitting the exam. Once the school offers itself as a centre they have to let any candidate who is registered there sit. There was an incident some years ago in Donegal when a school principal refused to admit students who were not in school uniform into an exam. he had to back down when the Dept. of Education got involved.
It happened to me when I was leaving school. Expelled and refused a reference. Sat the exams in the school and the lack of a reference was never a problem.

The school agrees to being a centre for the State Examinations Commission, but the school still has the right to refuse entry to their premises to people they do not want there.

So, while they could not stop them sitting the exam in another centre, they are quite within their rights to stop them sitting it in their school.

suicide_circus

uriah wrote: »

Criminal damage and assault for a start.

That should get them into court, resulting in a record that will keep them out of many countries.
I wonder if it was worth it?

Ehh....YEAH, pretty much!
http://static.pokato.net/2011-02-26-21-44-261141296106.jpg

rab!dmonkey

Shryke wrote: »

They're kids. It's way too harsh considering the effect it might have on their futures at this junction. They'd have to give some awful abuse to deserve that kind of treatment. Maybe they did though? Who knows.

What effect might this have on their futures? All that's happened is that they'll have to go to the next school down the road to do their exams.

Milk & Honey

spurious wrote: »

The school agrees to being a centre for the State Examinations Commission, but the school still has the right to refuse entry to their premises to people they do not want there.

So, while they could not stop them sitting the exam in another centre, they are quite within their rights to stop them sitting it in their school.

What makes you think that? The department has external candidates. What if they assign one to a nearby school? The school has already processed their applications the sit the exam at that school and registered them. Schools can't have it both ways.

Mardy Bum

Milk & Honey wrote: »

What makes you think that? The department has external candidates. What if they assign one to a nearby school? The school has already processed their applications the sit the exam at that school and registered them. Schools can't have it both ways.

External candidates have to find an examination centre themselves. The school can do what it likes. This happens quite a bit only it doesn't receive coverage because generally its not a private school.

JustAThought

c'mon: you remember the stress of the LC : how everything was hyped up twards it for two whole years; how your friends were so important to ya & the whole pistmortem thing after every exam. Imagine having to find another school ; your parents rage; not knowing where to go ; being estranged from everyone & in an alien environment.
The school has taken their money for X years ; it's hardly fair to actively **** them over like this at the final hurdle; they know exactly what they are doing to them.
Poor show.
And who in their right mind allowed a "rave" on premises; c'moff it.

The Big Red Button

JustAThought wrote: »

c'mon: you remember the stress of the LC : how everything was hyped up twards it for two whole years; how your friends were so important to ya & the whole pistmortem thing after every exam. Imagine having to find another school ; your parents rage; not knowing where to go ; being estranged from everyone & in an alien environment.
The school has taken their money for X years ; it's hardly fair to actively **** them over like this at the final hurdle; they know exactly what they are doing to them.
Poor show.
And who in their right mind allowed a "rave" on premises; c'moff it.

They f***ed themselves over! You're talking like the students are innocent victims in all of this! Any punishment they get, they brought it on themselves - and to be honest, while sitting the exams in another school may be inconvenient, it's not exactly going to traumatise them for life - I'm sure the poor little lambs will just find a way to cope with the "estrangement" and "alien environment". :rolleyes:

And I'm pretty sure that the point is that a rave wasn't allowed ... obviously ...

spurious

Milk & Honey wrote: »

What makes you think that? The department has external candidates. What if they assign one to a nearby school? The school has already processed their applications the sit the exam at that school and registered them. Schools can't have it both ways.

'What makes me think that' is that that is the way it is.

'External' candidates are added to schools all the time. There is an office in Cornamaddy dealing with last minute changes almost 24 hours a day during the exam period.

The schools involved in these incidents are private institutions. They can choose who they will and who they won't allow on their premises.
If one of them decides Johnny Bloggs is a risk due to recent behaviour, the SEC can tell Johnny he is to go to St. Madonna's up the road to sit his exam. It's no big deal. Happens very often.

The SEC runs the exams, not the schools, so the school cannot say 'You're not sitting your Leaving', only 'You're not sitting your Leaving in our centre'.

Milk & Honey

spurious wrote: »

'What makes me think that' is that that is the way it is.

'External' candidates are added to schools all the time. There is an office in Cornamaddy dealing with last minute changes almost 24 hours a day during the exam period.

The schools involved in these incidents are private institutions. They can choose who they will and who they won't allow on their premises.
If one of them decides Johnny Bloggs is a risk due to recent behaviour, the SEC can tell Johnny he is to go to St. Madonna's up the road to sit his exam. It's no big deal. Happens very often.

The SEC runs the exams, not the schools, so the school cannot say 'You're not sitting your Leaving', only 'You're not sitting your Leaving in our centre'.

There is no legal reason to do it. The SEC just doesn't have the guts to take on the schools and they want to keep jobs for the boys doing changeovers.More empire building.