<p>socaldad2- a disciplinary action without a disciplinary violation? A punishment without a crime? </p>
<p>except in the instance that a student is ultimately found not guilty of what they were initialy punished for, I am not sure I see that as the issue. But I might be missing something.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>That is suggested by the Comm App language, as otherwise it has superfluous words. </p>
<p>Also, see the discussion above about detentions for trivial matters. That would seem like disciplinary actions without disciplinary violations. Some random school official may impose a disciplinary action such as detention, but that doesn’t mean that the official has the authority to determine that a disciplinary violation occurred.</p>
<p>“Actually the colleges aren’t asking these questions, the common app people are surmising what they think colleges want to know.”</p>
<p>The folks who put together the common app are a committee of admissions officers who intend to use it.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Yes, I suppose it could be. Or you could just tell your kid, “You did it. 'Fess up and move on.”</p>
<p>mini has his agenda because of his previous employment. He has seen a lot of bad and ugly of underage drinking. I understand why he wants lead a crusade of making sure young people do not drink to excess. I have to say, with my recent encounter of some young people’s behavior in my office, I am not sure if I am in total disagreement with him. On the other hand, I also think there are some young people who may just be pushing the boundary a bit. IMO, one of the things of being young is to experiment and make mistakes sometimes, they do not need to be irrevocable mistakes and be punished over and over again. I have 2 young adults and I have met a lot of their friends. They do drink, but I do not believe they are irresponsible. I do applaud any school administration to be able to recognize that and come up with a way of making sure those kids won’t make the same mistake again. I think that’s what seahorserock’s school administration did. They deemed it was worth their while to tell the student, “if you promise to stay clean for the next 4 years then we will expunge this from your record.”</p>
<p>How many times does the kid need to fess up for a one time thing? Two three five times? Does it need to affect them for years? Should it affect merit aid? Should it follow them around and determine life altering events, because they drank at prom. </p>
<p>If the people directly affected say its gone, then gee, it should be gone.</p>
<p>This wasn’t rape, or cheating, or stealing, it was being with people who had pot brownies, and getting caught. Instead of fighting it because she wasnt caught red handed, she accepted the punishment. If we treated adults the way we treat teens, adults wouldn’t tolerate it. </p>
<p>My kid did her time, she shouldn’t have had to pay for it again and again.</p>
<p>SoCal’s point is well taken. What if Seahorses dau and friends were given funny brownies without their knowledge? How about spiked punch? Students can be in violation of the school policy without being responsible for it.</p>
<p>yeah, i don’t think that what happened in seahorses case was a big deal–kids should get second chances. with respect to the school-to-prison pipeline, those second chances should be afforded to ALL kids, regardless of socioeconomics. but we know that that isn’t happening. in schools with a heavy police presence, kids are being arrested for very minor offenses at a very young age (i think the youngest was in kindergarten!). by the time many of these kids get to high school, their records are already messed up. it’s a problem, and it deserves national attention and outrage. it may not receive the attention it deserves, though, until some ‘other’ kid gets denied what they feel is ‘their’ due, because of some dumb mistake they got caught up in in school.</p>
<p>I did have to wonder slightly about mini’s drinking focus. Oldfort’s comment cleared that up for me. I read the statement by mini that that all kids should be asked on the common app whether they had ever had a drink in their life to be a little over the top. My first thought to that was “seriously”. There are many kids who are going to experiment in high school and are not going to go on to be alcoholics. Also, if you aren’t a drinker, it isn’t going to take much to get you tipsy or drunk. If I had two drinks, I would be drunk. I don’t drink on a regular basis and am fairly small. I wouldn’t say the fact that someone was drunk would indicate that they had been binge drinking. Drinking yes, binge drinking, not necessarily. </p>
<p>IMHO, I also don’t think that asking the question on the common app would stop many kids from experimenting. Also, how would that work for some of the international students for whom it is very common to have a drink for special occasions? Are they going to get a special dispensation from the drinking question?</p>
<p>“My kid did her time, she shouldn’t have had to pay for it again and again.”</p>
<p>Why not? All those kids with permanent criminal records for dress code violations do. And again, and again, and again. Is there a reason why your kiid should be different? </p>
<p>And the reality is that she wasn’t asked to pay for it again and again. She was asked to put it on a form, and given the opportunity to explain. It’s not punishment, it’s filling out a form honestly and completely. </p>
<p>Kids make mistakes, and they move on. And I think it much better that they make mistakes at 16 than at 30. The colleges have a good reason to want to know about the level of an applicant’s maturity, and this gives them yet another opportunity to show it. That’s what the college admissions officers in post #175 are telling us, as are the college admissions officers who helped put together the Common Ap. </p>
<p>(Detentions are irrelevant - the Common Ap people went out of the way to tell the applicant that they meant probation on up.)</p>
<p>As for putting questions about drinking and drugging on the application, I think the colleges have a right to know as they wrestle with their own problems, it gives students yet another opportunity to display their maturity, and it sends a clear message. Doesn’t mean kids won’t drink or drug; nor that colleges won’t admit them; not that they will all lie. We can all agree that standard prevention messages don’t work effectively; why not use one that has a serious possibility of doing so? Or are we simply okay with the notion that the average student drinker starts at age 13 (which means half start earlier)?</p>
<p>There are also a lot of very rigid people, as we have seen on this thread, and some of them could be on adcoms, so I could understand why applicants wouldn’t want to do full disclosure.</p>
<p>mini…it was a pot brownie…</p>
<p>believe me, i’m as anti-mass incarceration as you probably are, but this? i think the goal is to work towards removing zero-tolerance across the board.</p>
<p>momofmusician-
For many internationals, the legal drinking age is in their teens. They nave been drinking legally for years.</p>
<p>"IMHO, I also don’t think that asking the question on the common app would stop many kids from experimenting. Also, how would that work for some of the international students for whom it is very common to have a drink for special occasions? Are they going to get a special dispensation from the drinking question? "</p>
<p>I don’t get it. Why is asking a question considered punishment? If the kids experimented, they could say so, and tell adcoms what they learned. International students could say they drink on special occasions. What’s so difficult? Everyone knows that about half the kids (NOT most) drink, so it won’t be a surprise. But since drinking and drugging are among the biggest factors in the academic success or failure of students at the college level, why wouldn’t an adcom want to know?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Maybe you know something I don’t . . . but from everything I know, wishing the past away doesn’t make it go away.</p>
<p>What your daughter did, she did. And nothing’s going to make it disappear - no matter how much you want it to. Whether it’s something she’ll have to pay for “again and again” is another matter entirely. If, as you say, it was a minor matter, why are you so afraid of people finding out about it?</p>
<p>If one does something horrific, then, yes, it’s likely to haunt that person for the rest of his or her life. But getting drunk (or possessing a pot brownie) at age 17? Really, I think you’re exaggerating how much anyone would ever care.</p>
<p>
Because there are a lot of judgmental people out there and people have different standards, as we have seen on this thread.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Well, that’s too bad. Actions have consequences. Recognizing that is part of growing up.</p>
<p>The adcoms want to know, and they’ve said so. It’s no different than your grade in AP chemistry (for some, actually probably more important), or your arrest for a dress-code violation. They say the information is valuable to them, and I have no reason to doubt them.</p>
<p>Are you being “doubly punished” when you get a B+ in Chemistry AND then they put it on your transcript?</p>
<p>Part of growing up is knowing less is more sometimes.</p>
<p>^^^ Huh? Sorry, please explain.</p>