Skip to comments.Teacher allegedly forced students to take off their underwear
Posted on 04/13/2011 11:56:34 AM PDT by newzjunkey
COLLINSVILLE -- A special-education teacher has been removed from the classroom after allegedly forcing students to remove their underwear.
According to a letter sent to parents earlier this week, the teacher observed feces on the classroom floor at Webster Elementary School on March 30.
To determine which student had soiled his pants, the teacher had each child go into a private bathroom stall by himself, remove his underpants, put his clothes back on and exit the stall to show his underpants to the teacher.
"The teacher was not present in the bathroom stall and at no time was your child exposed to the teacher," the letter read.
According to the letter, which was obtained by the News-Democrat via a Freedom of Information Act request, the teacher was trying to figure out which child had soiled himself so he could be sent to the nurse.
Superintendent Dennis Craft confirmed the incident and said the school board voted Monday not to renew the teacher's contract.
"The teacher is no longer in the classroom and will not be in any classroom for the remainder of the year, and he will not return next year," Craft said.
The teacher, who was not identified by the district, has not been charged with a crime.
There were about seven children in the classroom, all special-education students in third or fourth grade.
I'm not sure how the teacher was supposed to find the culprit that left the "present" on the floor. Maybe the mistake was investigating on his(?) own initiative and not sending all students to the nurse!
This story doesn’t pass the smell test...
yep, should have just sent all the students to the nurse.
I expect special education teachers have to put up with a lot of crap.
Maybe the teacher didn’t say “please.”
All the teacher could find was a Baby Ruth bar wrapper...
I agree this isn't a "perv teacher story". Had the teacher not done this, we'd be reading about the teacher who "forced a student to sit in soiled pants all day long." I suppose this should have been done in conjunction with the school nurse or somebody in administration. Administrators never have much of anything to do anyways, and most of what they already do is shit-work.
It’s an odd story.
If the kid comes home like that, what are the parents going to say about the school letting the kid sit there like that?
On the other hand, I think I could tell who it was pretty easily with my nose.
So this is what is going on in our public school system these days?
i have no intention of laughing since the first thought in my mind was eventually when the kids start to edge away from one of their own he would know.
I feel like there is additional circumstances which have not been mentioned.
Maybe but the whole thing would have been avoided if the teacher thought it through for 2 minutes.
I agree. I think the headline should have been. “Shit Discovered on Classroom Floor, Culprit Still At-Large”
Yep. The hatred against teachers in this culture is a little weird, frankly.
I just call them as I see them. This story is yellow journalism seeking a sensational headline where there doesn't appear to be one. Having said that, I wouldn't exactly call myself an apologist for teachers, although I do understand the good ones tend to be severely limited by the system in which they work, while the miserable ones tend to be enabled by it.
Didn’t the other kids know who dropped the load? If not, couldn’t they tell by the smell of the kid? I remember a
girl in a dress doing this in 1st grade and we all knew
who did it....
I wonder if the school ever got to the bottom of this...
The problem here is that public schools were never intended to be babysitting day care centers. Education is not a right and if the general public realied how many dollars are spent to “babysit” special education students, they would be outraged. If you can’t use a bathroom you have no business in public schools.
“yep, should have just sent all the students to the nurse.”
And, then the nurse would done what?
1. Just because its the nurse they could have personally “inspected” each child, and that would have been alright?
2. Just because its the nurse THEY would have been “allowed” to do what the teacher did?
“The nurse” option makes no sense; it presents nothing that is actually different.
So the teacher couldn’t get any of her seven charges to fess up. So how about the teacher simply having called for a janitor and gotten back to teaching? What’s the worst that would have happened? One of the special-ed kids would have gone home with “tracks” in their underwear? Wouldn’t have been the first time or the last and the parents probably know it.
Obviously whatever “slipped out” had not obviously shown any traces the teacher could see on the children’s clothes, so it does not sound like there was a danger of the issue spreading from one place one of the children might sit to another.
Even a sealed note home to the seven sets of parents would have been commendable; as in: “Today we had an incident in the classroom, and I was unable to determine the source, but it was definitely one of the children in the room. So, just in case your child might be having a problem, please ............................”.
“If the kid comes home like that, what are the parents going to say about the school letting the kid sit there like that?”
Why should the parents assume the teacher “let” the child that had the problem “sit there” as you say?
Even “special-ed” kids have enough training, from home even, to go to the bathroom and to know when they need to go to the bathroom.
So, instead of blaming the teacher, why wouldn’t the parents ask their child: “Why didn’t you tell the teacher you had to go to the bathroom?”
Completely reasonable action by the teacher. And, he should have whooped the kid that did it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.