the_rydster will like this. :)

Ill. students lose diplomas over cheers

By JAN DENNIS, Associated Press Writer

GALESBURG, Ill. - Caisha Gayles graduated with honors last month, but she is still waiting for her diploma. The reason: the whoops of joy from the audience as she crossed the stage.

Gayles was one of five students denied diplomas from the lone public high school in Galesburg after enthusiastic friends or family members cheered for them during commencement.

About a month before the May 27 ceremony, Galesburg High students and their parents had to sign a contract promising to act in dignified way. Violators were warned they could be denied their diplomas and barred from the after-graduation party.

Many schools across the country ask spectators to hold applause and cheers until the end of graduation. But few of them enforce the policy with what some in Galesburg say are strong-arm tactics.

"It was like one of the worst days of my life," said Gayles, who had a 3.4 grade-point average and officially graduated, but does not have the keepsake diploma to hang on her wall. "You walk across the stage and then you can't get your diploma because of other people cheering for you. It was devastating, actually."

School officials in Galesburg, a working-class town of 34,000 that is still reeling from the 2004 shutdown of a 1,600-employee refrigerator factory, said the get-tough policy followed a 2005 commencement where hoots, hollers and even air horns drowned out much of the ceremony and nearly touched off fights in the audience when the unruly were asked to quiet down.

"Lots of parents complained that they could not hear their own child's name called," said Joel Estes, Galesburg's assistant superintendent. "And I think that led us to saying we have to do something about this to restore some dignity and honor to the ceremony so that everyone can appreciate it and enjoy it."

In Indianapolis, public school officials this year started kicking out parents and relatives who cheer. At one school, the superintendent interrupted last month's graduation to order police to remove a woman from the gymnasium.

"It's an important, solemn occasion. There's plenty of time for celebration before and after," said Clarke Campbell, president of the Indianapolis school board.

In Galesburg, the issue has taken on added controversy with accusations that the students were targeted because of their race: four are black and one is Hispanic. Parents say cheers also erupted for white students, and none of them was denied a diploma.

Principal Tom Chiles said administrators who monitored the more than 2,000-seat auditorium reported only disruptions they considered "significant," and all turned in the same five names.

"Race had absolutely nothing to do with it whatsoever," Chiles said. "It is the amount of disruption at the time of the incident."

School officials said they will hear students and parents out if they appeal. Meanwhile, the school said the five students can still get their diplomas by completing eight hours of public service work, answering phones, sorting books or doing other chores for the district, situated about 150 miles southwest of Chicago.

Gayles' mother said she plans to fight the school board — in court if necessary — to get her daughter's diploma. The noise "was like three seconds. It was like, `Yay,' and that was it," Carolyn Gayles said.

American Civil Liberties Union spokesman Edward Yohnka said Galesburg's policy raises no red flags as long as it is enforced equitably. "It's probably well within the school's ability to control the decorum at an event like this," he said.

Another student who was denied her diploma, Nadia Trent, said she will probably let the school keep it if her appeals fail.

"It's not fair. Somebody could not like me and just decide to yell to get me in trouble. I can't control everyone, just the ones I gave tickets to," Trent said

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070601/ap_on_re_us/graduation_decorum

Meh. They mailed me mine. I couldn't be bothered with that ceremonial BS.

Meh. They mailed me mine. I couldn't be bothered with that ceremonial BS.


Wow... That's how I felt about it... both times. In high school I could have finished early but they wouldn't let me because everyone had to go through the whole ceremonial crap in the spring. The spring semester of my senior year was the biggest waste of time in entire life so far... and I only qualify it that way just in case I might do time in prison some day.

I finished my BA program in Industrial Design at the end of the fall term and I had zero interest in going to my graduation ceremony in the spring. I just wanted my diploma mailed to me but my folks insisted that I go for them. It couldn't have been much more painfully boring. I was in a bad mood all day and I was just going through the motions. Ultimately it turned out that we didn't receive our actual diplomas that day and they were mailed to us about four weeks later. :cryin:

Ain't personal responsibility a biaatch?

Ain't personal responsibility a biaatch?

Yes, especially when one is punished for actions of others. That will teach them to be responsible for their own actions all right.

Funny how none of the cheers for white kids were "significant" enough to deny them diplomas.

Looks to me like the school defined the boundaries from the start. The kids and parents signed an agreement.

/Does seem harsh though. Kids should probably get their diplomas in a week or two.

//Do not see how this is related to the other thread though.

Ain't personal responsibility a biaatch?
Unless I read the article wrong...it seems that personal responsibility is about the last thing on trial here. Unless of course the person walking on stage was "controlling" those in the audience and exorting them to cheer for them...

This is a stupid P.C. thing...some kids are less popular than others so the school doesn't like it when a popular kid gets his or her diploma to the woots and shouts of nicknames...only to have the "geek" ...enter next alphabetically to the sound of crickets.

Unless I read the article wrong...it seems that personal responsibility is about the last thing on trial here. Unless of course the person walking on stage was "controlling" those in the audience and exorting them to cheer for them...

This is a stupid P.C. thing...some kids are less popular than others so the school doesn't like it when a popular kid gets his or her diploma to the woots and shouts of nicknames...only to have the "geek" ...enter next alphabetically to the sound of crickets.

What the schools should realize is that more than likely, the "geek" not getting the applause is probably going to go on and make something of him/herself. How many times have we seen that in the recent past? I've got to agree with you here TMB. This is like how at little league games now, they don't keep score (at some places I've heard of), so that no kids will be upset that they lost a ball game (this actually happens with some of the leagues kids of people that I work with play in). I mean, it's kind of sad that some kids aren't learning that there is losing and winning, and how to deal with both of those. This is like another case of that. I think.

Do not see how this is related to the other thread though.


Is it?

Looks to me like the school defined the boundaries from the start. The kids and parents signed an agreement.

What were their options? Don't sign the agreement and your kid doesn't get to attend the graduation ceremony. Or sign the agreement and don't celebrate your kid graduating. Sorry, but those are unreasonable. Since when has graduation been a solemn occasion? Funerals are solemn occasions. Graduations are celebrations.

Whoever came up with this agreement and policy should be fired. Punishing the kid for the actions of others is incomprehensible. Because their parents or friends were too exuberant at a special, once in a lifetime moment, the kid can't get a diploma unless they complete eight hours of public service work? What a great example that sets for our kids.

If this had happened to my kid, I would have my kid sue the school. The school can then attempt to justify how my kid could be punished for the actions of others they do not control. It should be a slam dunk.

Unless I read the article wrong...it seems that personal responsibility is about the last thing on trial here. Unless of course the person walking on stage was "controlling" those in the audience and exorting them to cheer for them...

This is a stupid P.C. thing...some kids are less popular than others so the school doesn't like it when a popular kid gets his or her diploma to the woots and shouts of nicknames...only to have the "geek" ...enter next alphabetically to the sound of crickets.
Those kids have an obligation to inform their guests of the rules. I don't think popularity has a thing to do with this...people cheering at graduations are just cheering because they are amazed you graduated!:D How embarassing! Like 8 hours of community service is going to kill them. How about anyone graduating high school do 80 hours of community service, recieving a bachelors...200 hours.
Mohair...unreasonable? No one said you can't celebrate, what you can't do is drown out the reading of other graduates names. Do we really need graduations to last 6 hours so we can get in everyones applause? I think it sets a FANTASTIC example. If you get anywhere in life you will be responsible for others actions, whether they be your employees or your own children. You should be estatic that the public school system is finally teaching life skills! Sue the school? That's a laugh, participating in a voluntary event with an agreement you signed and then being held to that agreement is grounds for suit? The slam dunk will be the attorney taking your money with not a prayer of a case.

Sue the school? That's a laugh, participating in a voluntary event with an agreement you signed and then being held to that agreement is grounds for suit? The slam dunk will be the attorney taking your money with not a prayer of a case.


Sure, and I am sure the school district will have no problem explaining why they only punished the minorities, and no white kids got the punishment when THEIR guests broke the rules. Because white folk yelling was not "significant".

Same rules, same actions, but different treatement, different outcomes, different races. Yeah, no case at all there.

Sure, and I am sure the school district will have no problem explaining why they only punished the minorities, and no white kids got the punishment when THEIR guests broke the rules. Because white folk yelling was not "significant".

Same rules, same actions, but different treatement, different outcomes, different races. Yeah, no case at all there.

Does a basketball team have to 'explain' why it has no white players on the court?

Your weak attempt at insinuating that racism is at work is less than I would have expected from you Hoo. Outcome proves nothing.

Yeah! Boolah Boolah!

Does a basketball team have to 'explain' why it has no white players on the court?

Your weak attempt at insinuating that racism is at work is less than I would have expected from you Hoo. Outcome proves nothing.



And I would have expected just about the level of your post from you.

Your analogy is weak. In basketball there is an objective way of comparing what people do. Jumping, speed, shooting, defense, etc.

In THIS case the objective criteria, ACCORDING TO REPORTS OF THE INCIDENT, were not the cause of the punishment. Reports are that some white students were cheered, but not denied their diplomas. Did the school officials use a sound meter, and only make decisions based on decibel levels? Or did they just use their judgment? Because I know of hundreds of studies that show that "judgment" calls often result in racially biased outcomes.

So yes, when I see a case where minority students are punished and white student are not because of a judgment call, I do tend to think racism.

Please explain to me how the FACT that no white kids were punished for violating the written contract does NOT raise questions of racism?

Please explain to me how the FACT that no white kids were punished for violating the written contract does NOT raise questions of racism?

The burden of proof lies with you to demonstrate these were racially motivated decisions.

Like I said, outcome proves nothing, especially when there are only a handful of kids involved (I know you like to bring statistics into these sorts of things...when they are meaningful at least).

And I would have expected just about the level of your post from you.

Your analogy is weak. In basketball there is an objective way of comparing what people do. Jumping, speed, shooting, defense, etc.

In THIS case the objective criteria, ACCORDING TO REPORTS OF THE INCIDENT, were not the cause of the punishment. Reports are that some white students were cheered, but not denied their diplomas. Did the school officials use a sound meter, and only make decisions based on decibel levels? Or did they just use their judgment? Because I know of hundreds of studies that show that "judgment" calls often result in racially biased outcomes.

So yes, when I see a case where minority students are punished and white student are not because of a judgment call, I do tend to think racism.

Please explain to me how the FACT that no white kids were punished for violating the written contract does NOT raise questions of racism?

At first blush, without even reading anything about it, I thought it sounded like there were divisions along racial lines. Sadly enough, I still think racial tensions in the community play a major role in this situation. If the ACLU does not step in and get these kids the diploma they earned, they should just start campaigning for the hated Neocons.

Mohair...unreasonable? No one said you can't celebrate, what you can't do is drown out the reading of other graduates names. Do we really need graduations to last 6 hours so we can get in everyones applause? I think it sets a FANTASTIC example. If you get anywhere in life you will be responsible for others actions, whether they be your employees or your own children. You should be estatic that the public school system is finally teaching life skills! Sue the school? That's a laugh, participating in a voluntary event with an agreement you signed and then being held to that agreement is grounds for suit? The slam dunk will be the attorney taking your money with not a prayer of a case.

Yes, unreasonable. Here's a life lesson for you. The only way you can reasonably hold anyone accountable for the actions of others is within a power structure where the person accountable is superior to the others, and therefore responsible for setting and enforcing the rules. Does that sound like a parent-child relationship? Of course it does, except the parents are responsible for the children, not the other way around. Punishing children for the actions of their parents, who are their superiors, is not just unreasonable, it's unrealistic.

The FANTASTIC example this sets for the kids is that there are people out there who will screw them over at any opportunity, and rather than let them get away with it, the kids need to learn to fight back. If this happened to my child, I would encourage them to sue the school to get their diploma. Note that I'm not going the sue the school, my child will. I am not the injured party. I would act as a witness and explain that my children, like children everywhere, do not have the authority to create or enforce rules that apply to their parents. The school doesn't have the power or the ability to change that dynamic, but that is what they tried to do. Who doesn't understand that? The case would be a slam dunk, and a huge embarrassment to the school.

Those kids have an obligation to inform their guests of the rules. I don't think popularity has a thing to do with this...people cheering at graduations are just cheering because they are amazed you graduated!:D How embarassing! Like 8 hours of community service is going to kill them. How about anyone graduating high school do 80 hours of community service, recieving a bachelors...200 hours.
Mohair...unreasonable? No one said you can't celebrate, what you can't do is drown out the reading of other graduates names. Do we really need graduations to last 6 hours so we can get in everyones applause? I think it sets a FANTASTIC example. If you get anywhere in life you will be responsible for others actions, whether they be your employees or your own children. You should be estatic that the public school system is finally teaching life skills! Sue the school? That's a laugh, participating in a voluntary event with an agreement you signed and then being held to that agreement is grounds for suit? The slam dunk will be the attorney taking your money with not a prayer of a case.

So...what we have here is a person that didn't look up "personal responsiblity" with ther GOGGLE Key...before posting how this exemplified when it really was its antithesis. But now rather than simply saying..."you know what WIKI just told me personal responsibility has to do with being responsible for your own actions not the actions of others, especially those that you are ultimately subordinate too (older relatives, parents and the like)"... You went the other way didn't you...and we are all rolling our eyes because of it.

It is the internet, no one on the street is going to stop and tell you how wrong you were, so don't be bashful...fess up.

The burden of proof lies with you to demonstrate these were racially motivated decisions.

Like I said, outcome proves nothing...

I never spoke to the MOTIVATION for the actions, only about the actions.

Differential treatment, differential outcome. You seem to care about the state of mind of the authorities, I care about the actions of the authorities. The chances of them admitting racial motivation even if, ESPECIALLY IF it was there are near zero.

So, where do you get your expertise on US race relations? Why should I listen to you on this issue? Especially given your interesting ideas about evidence here and in other threads.

So...what we have here is a person that didn't look up "personal responsiblity" with ther GOGGLE Key...before posting how this exemplified when it really was its antithesis. But now rather than simply saying..."you know what WIKI just told me personal responsibility has to do with being responsible for your own actions not the actions of others, especially those that you are ultimately subordinate too (older relatives, parents and the like)"... You went the other way didn't you...and we are all rolling our eyes because of it.

It is the internet, no one on the street is going to stop and tell you how wrong you were, so don't be bashful...fess up.
What has this to do with Google and Wiki? Is Wiki the new Fox News demon for you guys?

As far as race, I fully agree that if students were singled out because of race then there is a big problem, but our scolars here somehow are oblivious when it comes to the article only having one paragraph regarding racial accusations and it doesn't bother to mention a source other than 'parents'. The article does give specific examples of how graduations are getting out of control and what several school districts are doing to combat it. The ACLU isn't interested, that must be something of a clue eh?
So how do we teach personal responsibility, the type we are going to need in future leaders? Aren't you guys the ones who hollar at the moon about our current leaders inability to follow the rules???

So how do we teach personal responsibility, the type we are going to need in future leaders? Aren't you guys the ones who hollar at the moon about our current leaders inability to follow the rules???


You teach it by applying the rule equitably and by punishing those who break the rules in the same equitable manner.

Why punish the foot soldier in Iraq for the mess the CiC created? It's not his fault his boss is a f*ck up.

You teach it by applying the rule equitably and by punishing those who break the rules in the same equitable manner.

Why punish the foot soldier in Iraq for the mess the CiC created? It's not his fault his boss is a f*ck up.

Who here is argueing against that?

WTF is boolah?

I never spoke to the MOTIVATION for the actions, only about the actions.

Motivation is everything. You said my basketball analogy is weak, but it is not, it shows that differential outcome does not necessarily mean that racism is at work, the coach being motivated to pick the best team....of course by your logic this is racist, since differential action and outcome is racist no matter the motivation.

Also you say that there was differential treatment, do you have any objective evidence to support this? No I do not think so. It is quite possible that the family and friends of the ethnic kids were especially noisy, statistically speaking the odds of this (5 ethic kids being selected at random) are hardly astronomical, and I know how you have pulled apart conclusions based on bad stats in other threads, yet here a population of 5 seems enough to make your conclusion?!


The chances of them admitting racial motivation even if, ESPECIALLY IF it was there are near zero.

Indeed it is a terrible thing when people will not admit to their crimes, if only they would admit straight away, or better still, if we could make them automatically guilty, based on percieved/alleged motivation, and/or action we could do away with half the justice system! What a better world we would live in!

Interesting, that in a court of law, the burden of proving guilt lies with the prosection, but in this case the burden seems to lie with the accused having to prove their innocence?! You imply that motivation cannot be proved? Motivation is a factor in many homicide trial (and I still see murderers convicted?!)

Maybe you should thing next time before you shout "J'accuse!"?!

/just saying.
//thought you were more fair minded.

Motivation is everything. ....

and I know how you have pulled apart conclusions based on bad stats in other threads, yet here a population of 5 seems enough to make your conclusion?!




Someone might have a motivation of scaring someone else, and point a gun at them, and the gun goes off.... but someone still ends up dead regardless of the motivation. Sometimes bad actions produce bad results, regardless of good intentions.

And as for your grasp of statistics, don't even start. It is not a population of five, it is a sample of five. The population refers to the entire group, not the group taken out of the population.

Further, there is not a SAMPLE of five in any case. Samples are drawn on some random factor, normally, but in this case there is nothing random about it. Now, you might ask what is the probability of a 5 minority sample given a population percentage of X% minority. But in this case, there is no sample, merely a number.

As for legal proof, I am not required to have it to express my opinion on this situation. I am sure there is a video tape that was made that shows just how many kids were cheered (breaking the rule) and I will bet you it is more than 5. Given the pattern of race relations in the USA, and the history of race relations in Galesburg and that part of Illinois, you are correct that I want to see proof that race and evaluations about race (conscious or unconscious) were not part of what was going on here.

Oh and I love this:

Motivation is everything. ....

It is quite possible that the family and friends of the ethnic kids were especially noisy....



That is exactly what the school officials are saying. By their judgment, not by objective measures, the dark kids were causing more trouble. Other people broke the rules, but by the judgment of the officials not "bad enough". Did the policy say kids who are cheered for TOO MUCH get punished? Because I missed that part.

I asked you why I should listen to you on this. You have given me no answer. I can tell you that I am familiar with so many cases like this, where rules are enforced along racial lines, that it sickens me. So, why should your evaluation of this situation carry any weight at all? Seriously. Have you ever been the USA? The midwest? Rural midwest, like Galesburg? Have you ever studied race relations in the USA?



Edit:

Here I took 2 minutes and found this from the local paper in the town where it happened.:

http://www.register-mail.com/stories/053007/LOE_BDBTGUUH.GID.shtml

"Carl Kelley said he understood Galesburg High School's desire to have an orderly graduation, but not the enforcement of the rules.

"Look, there were plenty of people who cheered for kids who weren't singled out and who got their diplomas," he said. "And let me tell you, the only people we saw who were denied diplomas were black or mixed kids. I'm white and I noticed. My niece is mixed and I think that might have made her a target."

Amanda Kelley's mom chimed in.

"People yelled for football players and cheerleaders and other kids," Pamela Kelley said. "They all got their diplomas. If you were white - or an important kid - you got your diploma."


Since that is a white person saying it, maybe you will put more weight on the claims.

Who here is argueing against that?

You and others seem to be arguing that punishing the kids for the actions of their parents is the correct course of action. That's not only inequitable, it's illogical as well.

Correct me if I'm wrong in how I've read your posts.

You and others seem to be arguing that punishing the kids for the actions of their parents ...

Please note that it is not only parents, but ANYONE in the ceremony who yells. I could do it for my neighbor's punk kid for example, in order to get him in trouble. So in effect these kids are being punished for something someone, somewhere in the auditorium did.

So in effect these kids are being punished for something someone, somewhere in the auditorium did.


Yep, that'll teach 'em responsibility! :rolleyes:

Someone might have a motivation of scaring someone else, and point a gun at them, and the gun goes off.... but someone still ends up dead regardless of the motivation. Sometimes bad actions produce bad results, regardless of good intentions.

Is that an argument for more gun laws or for postitive descrimination?


And as for your grasp of statistics, don't even start. It is not a population of five, it is a sample of five. The population refers to the entire group, not the group taken out of the population.

Further, there is not a SAMPLE of five in any case. Samples are drawn on some random factor, normally, but in this case there is nothing random about it. Now, you might ask what is the probability of a 5 minority sample given a population percentage of X% minority. But in this case, there is no sample, merely a number.


Despite your pedantic critique of my terminology, my general point is still correct; the probability of 5 ethnic kids being drawn at random is not significantly high.

Despite your pedantic critique of my terminology, my general point is still correct; the probability of 5 ethnic kids being drawn at random is not significantly high.

Really? Let's see.

Galesburg IL is about 84% white, 10% black, and 5% hispanic. So, if we assume the schools are of similar percentages, please show your calculations to show that the probability of getting no white students given 5 singled out students is "not significantly high". I would like to see how you draw your conclusions on this matter. Because with 80% white students the expected number would be 4 white kids and one not white. 3 and 2, not a big difference from expected, but 0 and 5?

The probability calculation is relatively straight forward. Go for it.


And again, where does your knowledge of race in the USA come from?

Galesburg IL is about 84% white, 10% black, and 5% hispanic. So, if we assume the schools are of similar percentages,
And again, where does your knowledge of race in the USA come from?

Source?

Source?

2000 census data. You can see that here along with other information: http://www.citytowninfo.com/places/illinois/galesburg

Or just use google, the basic information is out there in many places. Perhaps you might want to think about looking some of it up before making pronouncements in the future.

2000 census data. You can see that here along with other information: http://www.citytowninfo.com/places/illinois/galesburg

Or just use google, the basic information is out there in many places. Perhaps you might want to think about looking some of it up before making pronouncements in the future.

Extrapolating that data with regards to the racial makeup of those who graduated is questionable.

Extrapolating that data with regards to the racial makeup of those who graduated is questionable.

Refute his data with this handy chart (below)...it won't help, but you are doing so poorly against a PhD who uses statistics everyday of his life...that it can't hurt either.

Refute his data with this handy chart (below)...it won't help, but you are doing so poorly against a PhD who uses statistics everyday of his life...that it can't hurt either.

I thought you had taken refuge in the hills, to write your manifesto.

/nice to see academics support each other.

I thought you had taken refuge in the hills, to write your manifesto.

/nice to see academics support each other.

Hmmm....don't know where you came up with that.

As for support...one doesn't need to be part of academia to know who is getting their arse handed to them. There is the knife to a gunfight cliche...but I think your knife may be plastic.

WTF is boolah?


Yale fight song circa 1901.


words and music by Allan M. Hirsch, Class of 1901
sung by the Yale Glee Club

Boola, Boola;

Boola, Boola;

Boola, Boola;
When we "roughhouse" poor old Harvard,
They will holler Boola Boo.
Oh! Yale, Eli Yale!

Refute his data with this handy chart (below).

Holy sh*t! I damn near just choked to death. :D

Of course, this absurd exercise by the school admins provides an excellent guide for how ANYONE can deny any kid his or her diploma next year. I bet there will be alot of white kids next year with alot of exuberant supporters. What a wonderful way to encourage a sense of community.

Refute his data with this handy chart (below)...it won't help, but you are doing so poorly against a PhD who uses statistics everyday of his life...that it can't hurt either.
Personally I would up the "Resembles Pac Man" part of the chart a smidge for a more accurate representation.