Last month Washington, DC Councilman Jim Graham introduced a bill that would ban or restrict young people (everyone under 21) from clubs and music venues in the city. First reported on here in February when we highlighted the amazing committee testimony of Ian MacKaye and Spencer’s thoughts on the underage ban. Since then we’ve been doing some behind the scenes work to stand up for the youth in Washington DC on this very important issue.

In response to the outcry over his bill, Councilman Graham invited community leaders, club owners, and other stake holders in the city to attend weekly meetings to discuss the fine points of his bill and work out compromises that everyone can live with. As the only true representatives of the young people this bill will most affect, NYRA Executive Director Alex Koroknay-Palicz (i.e. me) and NYRA President Scott Davidson have been at these meetings making our views heard.

This has been an excellent experience, and a great opportunity to influence policy directly. There were many important stakeholders present, but most of the time the only people in the room under 30 were NYRA officials. While it was disappointing more young people weren’t present, NYRA’s perspective was invaluable in the discussions that raged in the workgroup. Having a seat at the table showed everyone that young people wouldn’t be silent on the issues that affect their lives.

Because of these workgroup meetings, Graham’s bill is now more acceptable than it ever was before. With the exceptions added we are no longer looking at a ban on everyone under 21. All age shows have been pulled back from the brink of extinction and will be fully allowed for any venue that applies for an “underage endorsement”.

After seeing some progress on the club issue, the discussion took a dire turn when a proposal to make underage drinking in the District a criminal offense. Currently, and for most of DC’s history, underage drinking has been a civil - not a criminal - offense. Individuals who were caught drinking under 21 were given a ticket and fined, but were not thrown in jail and nothing was added to their criminal record. This all would have changed if not for NYRA’s intervention.

The main concern was that club owners were being held accountable and punished for serving drinks to someone underage, but the people buying those drinks rarely faced punishment. These club owners were upset they had to pay the price for someone else trying to break the law and wanted a stronger deterrent to underage drinking within their establishments. NYRA was joined by George Washington University Student Association President Lamar Thorpe in opposing the new change.

The room soon became deadlocked and it was starting to look like the underage drinking criminalization would be added to the bill regardless of our objections. Then Scott Davidson came up with a compromise - criminalize it inside clubs, but leave it decriminalized everywhere else. While not perfect, this was a compromise everyone could accept.

With the bill’s language finalized it will now go to another city council hearing. NYRA intends to follow this bill every step of the way and be present at the hearing. We will inform everyone about the public hearing as soon as we receive information about it. We are making important progress that will yield tangible results for the rights of youth in our nation’s capitol.

Comments(0)

Dear A.C. Reynolds High School Administration:

Some members of the School Leadership Team have recently announced their desire to ban the use of electronic devices by students during school hours.  Some members believe that students should still be able to use these devices during their lunch period, while others are completely opposed to any changes.  As a representative of the student body, I officially declare my opposition to any changes to the current policy concerning electronic devices.

Students have many valid reasons to use cell phones during class changes and during lunch.  As it is, students are not allowed to use the phone in the classroom, and they are discouraged from using the phones in the office.  If a student needed to contact a parent or guardian during the day, he or she could use a cell phone instead of tying up the phones in the office and risking the possibility of being late to class.  Moreover, a parent can leave a message on his or her child’s cell phone, which can then be collected during class change.  In addition to contacting parents, a student may have a variety of other reasons for using a cell phone throughout the school day.

The ban of cell phones during class change and lunch will not affect the students who currently use cell phones during class.  Students will still have their cell phones in their possession.  Additionally, the use of cell phones during non-instructional time does not affect teachers at all.  Therefore, we do not see any need to punish all students collectively.  Instead of imposing these limitations, the administration should consider more productive methods of dealing with students who are actually caught using a cell phone or other electronic device during instructional time.

Thank you,

Adam King

Comments(2)

Personal Email Accounts – BCS Meeting – April 5, 2007

It has come to the attention of the School Leadership Team at Reynolds High School, of which I am a member, that the county’s Technology Department has been directed to ban all personal email account usage for the next school year.  The ban would affect teachers and students alike.

Many students and teachers are opposed to this proposal.  Policy #646 currently states that students and staff should have access to electronic mail communication, among other technological components.

Many teachers and students use personal email accounts as a more effective and efficient alternative to school email accounts.

Teachers use personal email to participate in mailing lists that are vital to the enhancement of their classrooms.

Students use personal email accounts for a plethora of valid reasons.  They save their research and documents for projects, including the senior project, on their email accounts.  Students also use email at school to communicate with community experts for the interview portion of their senior projects, to communicate with teachers, and to turn in their work to Turnitin.com.

The public relations officer of my school’s student council does not have access to Internet at home.  She uses her personal email at school to remind members of upcoming events and projects.

Offering BCSemail accounts to students would not be a logical solution if teachers would have to approve each message that a student sends.  Teachers have expressed their concern that they would not have enough time to approve all students’ email.  If there is a delay in approving messages, it could affect a senior’s eligibility to a scholarship and his or her completion of the senior project.  If BCSemail is offered to students, the email should not have to be approved by teachers.  Instead, allow the Technology Department to monitor the email in the same way that they monitor teachers’ email.

Schools must prepare students for the workforce and make students technologically competent.  We need to make our students more globally competitive.  If we expect our students to be proficient in a corporate and consumer world that is constantly increasing and improving the use of technology, we must allow students access to the resources that are at the very foundation of this system, including email.  Some students do not have access to these resources at home.  If the school board bans personal email accounts, the students who do not have Internet at home will suffer more than any other group of students.

The Internet is not going to go away, and I believe that these rules will cause more students to become disillusioned with school and just make them more likely to drop out.  We would be doing a disservice to our students if this proposal was implemented.  I realize that some students abuse their Internet privileges, but we should not punish all students collectively for a few students’ inappropriate actions.

I encourage you to think about the consequences this proposal will have if ratified.

Thank you,

Adam King

Comments(1)

Dear North Carolina Legislator:

As your constituent, I encourage you to support HB853/S874. HB853/S874 is the bill that would prohibit the use of corporal punishment in public schools across the state. North Carolina is one of 21 states that still allows school districts to use corporal punishment. There are many alternatives to spanking a student, for example, detention or suspension. In some districts, teachers have not been held accountable for using excessive force against students, which has led to severe injuries. As you are aware, the Buncombe County Board of Education does not permit the use of corporal punishment within its schools, and several key education officials, including Dr. June Atkinson, have endorsed this bill. I hope you will do the same.

Thank you,

Adam King

Comments(0)