For the second action project of my Winter Term course, Argument we very thoroughly discussed how our history used valid argument to get their point across more effectively. More specifically, we dove deeper into the Declaration of Independence and the U.S. Constitution. We also discussed different forms and techniques of argument or fallacies, such as: Ad Hominem (addressing your dislike for the presenter of an argument, opposed to the argument itself), etc. Along with our studies regarding the U.S. Constitution, we also reviewed the amendments created in that document. You guessed it, our assignment was to review our school's Code of Conduct and choose a section in which we wanted to justify or "amend." Now this project was a problem for me at the beginning, as I found close to nothing wrong with the Code of Conduct. Fortunately, a couple hours past and I remembered that a younger student from my school suffered from a bad illness which then restricted him from being at school for a very long month and a half or so. This struck my mind when he told me that he had to drop one of his courses because the workload was petrifying. Below I will explain why I believe there should be some justification in these situations.
The Code of Conduct addresses truancy in at least 2 key places. First, it is defined as:
...tardiness or absence (s) without a valid excuse. A student out of school without a valid excuse is considered truant. Truant students must arrange with their teachers to make up missed work. Parents will be notified of unexcused tardiness or absence.
Later in the Attendance Procedures section of the CoC, the details about truancy are expressed in this way:
A parent or guardian is expected to communicate an absence with GCE Lab School as soon as possible when a student is going to be absent. Students are expected to contact their teachers as soon as they are able to address next steps for makeup work.
If a student is absent for more than 20% of classes during a term, the student and family will meet with the Disciplinary Council to address appropriate school placement and support systems.
Tardies
If a student acquires 4 tardies in a two week period, they will be expected to meet with the Disciplinary Council to create an action plan for improving their timeliness. The Co-Curricular Coordinator will communicate with students and families every two weeks regarding tardies.
A student will be considered absent from a class if they miss more than 25% of a class on a given day.
In either case of a tardy or an absence, it is the responsibility of the student to reach out to each of the instructors to figure out a way to complete/make up missing work.
______________________________________________________________________________
I chose to amend this section of the CoC simply because there’s not always a clear understanding on the part of the school of why students are absent. I argue that the school uses the term “unexcused absence” too loosely. There’s no say in who decides if an absence is unexcused. This rule is a bit corrupt, as it promotes students working in a non-working state. In other words, if the student is unable to complete work for whatever reason, there should be a compromise.
Simply put, the attendance rules section of the CoC has a clear argument, which is formally recorded below:
P1: Students are subject to illness at pretty much anytime.
P2: Students are expected to attend school whenever it is in session.
P3: Students are expected to complete each day's assignments and homework.
C: Students who are absent are 100% responsible for making up the work they missed.
My interpretation of the CoC’s argument on this topic is that natural and unnatural illness has a mind of its own, so according to the duration of time a student is not in school, I think we should be assigned work, justice. There should be a feasible workload for the students who suffer from illness!
I propose to amend this section of the CoC through a different syllogism:
P1: Students might get sick, temporarily physically impaired, etc…
P2: Students are not to blame for their illness.
P3: Students are responsible for their daily schoolwork, including homework assignments.
C: Students should, according to the amount of time they miss, communicate with Eric (the Director) and their teachers to obtain the necessary information to complete a REALISTIC amount of work to keep up with their peers and course content. This entails that the amount of work assigned to that student be realistic for him to complete in a feasible time period.
To spice it up for you guys, I would like to represent my argument with an interesting analogy. Imagine you lay down your laptop on a glass table, then go to the restroom. Upon going to the restroom, that glass collapses, along with your laptop. You pray to whoever that your laptop is still in top-notch shape, but frankly, it’s not. Now, it wasn’t your fault, but you still have to deal with the situation because it happened. It’s just reality, a reality that should, however, be adjusted for those too young to remedy the crisis 100%.
This revised version of the section I chose will change things at our school for the better. If it be extremely necessary, students should be excused from work and “truancy.” Not everything is excusable, but excuses are necessary sometimes. know a student who was out for approximately 2 months and he legitimately dropped a whole course! This student is a freshman and he already has to make up an entire course. That is definitely cruel and unusual! I propose a medicine for this.
In a larger legislative context, my new amendment is connected to the 8th amendment 8 of the U.S. Constitution, which focuses on citizens rights to be protected from cruel and unusual punishment. Is it not extreme for a freshman to have to drop a course because he was sick for an amount of time that was not in his power to change? Sure, my proposal isn’t as serious as the Constitutional amendment itself, but who’s to say it’s not unjust or unusual punishment? As it is a school rule affecting all students that is still far from fair.
The impact of this revision will be nothing but positive for the community. I would say that based upon the motive behind my amendment proposal, my argument will benefit all of the “citizens” of my school and help protect them from excessive punishment in situations beyond their control.
An actual student, MO, inspired me to address the attendance section of the CoC, in the first place. He supports my argument and stated “The workload they tried to give me was ridiculous. I had to drop the class. A little stressful, but I’ll be alright.” That quote represents the core of my argument. This student is subject to unfair punishment because he was sick, which doesn’t make much sense at all.
In conclusion, MO at my school suffers from this corrupt system that my school has put in place where the student is almost “too accountable” for his absence. In doing so, the school has expressed beliefs of carelessness for their students by assigning an overload of work which is situationally unrealistic depending on the state of the student. I fight for fair conditions concerning the sick students at my school. I hope you believe in my amendment as much as I do!
No comments:
Post a Comment