Letter from School quoting Abusive Language

GeekPetite

My husband works as an moderator/admin on a child friendly multiplayer server for a sandbox game that's very popular with kids (think an online version of lego).

In our experience, the kind of language you infer is commonplace. We have a language filter to prevent this, but every time someone gets muted for breaking the rules we can see exactly what they've said. Bearing in mind the youngest player we have is 8, some players' language/behaviour is shocking-thank heavens it doesn't get seen by others.

One thing I have noticed is that using Skype/Teamspeak to bypass the filter is also commonplace. We can't police that sadly. We have had several cases of bullying and unless it's typed-you can't prove it. The first thing a new player will ask is who's on Skype, they're asking to talk to complete strangers!!! It's just not safe.

My point is that despite your efforts to protect your children within your environment. They WILL have heard this stuff, at a friend's house, in the playground etc. It's just too common online for it not to be used by some children in everyday life.

Whilst it's shocking to you, sadly it won't be to some parents. They'll just think it's high jinks. To be honest, my hubby's as bad when he plays a certain over 18's first person shooter. The difference is we don't have kids and he doesn't talk like that if he's in a party with under 18's (who shouldn't be playing said game by the way).

These parents need to know that it's not high jinks, it's unacceptable, and that allowing their kids free access to Skype isn't always a good thing. Skype allows video calling, and I know of one girl (16) who would allow a male online "friend" (32) to watch her sleep as she thought they were in love and it was romantic.

Yes, the language you saw was shocking (that was the headteacher's point) and shouldn't be acceptable. But that's what is actually happening and burying heads in the sand (any parent, not specifically you) isn't helping. Shock tactics are sometimes the only way to get through. This was a transcript of an actual event, not a suggestion of what might happen, it happened. The headteacher is trying to stop it happening again.

meritaten

I think a parents meeting would be a good idea. I don't think the OP or us have the full facts.

cte1111

meritaten wrote: »

I am totally amazed at how naïve some posters are. Haven't you listened to any group of preteens lately? I can only assume you are all in work and think that 'playground' gossip and games are still 'rounders' and 'hopscotch'.
Wake up and smell the coffee! even in primary school the playground talk is of 'boyfriends', 'my dealer dad', 'make up', 'fashion', 'sex', 'getting big boobs' and other 'grown-up issues'.

and the language is rather 'ripe'. then they trot off into the classroom and become nice polite ten year olds. butter wouldn't melt in their mouths.
Kids have always had 'secret lives' away from grown-ups. these kids are having a very scary secret life though - this is 'extreme'. perhaps the head is hoping for some parents to come forward with information?

I guess that this post demonstrates why the head decided to include the transcript, as it makes it clear to us how far past boyfriends, boobs and fashion the conversation went. The language wasn't just ripe, e.g. something you might hear in the pub, it was worse. Maybe some people would make the assumption that you did, that it was just a bit of semi grown up chat, if they didn't see the 'proof' themselves.

larkrisetocandleford

cte1111 wrote: »

I guess that this post demonstrates why the head decided to include the transcript, as it makes it clear to us how far past boyfriends, boobs and fashion the conversation went. The language wasn't just ripe, e.g. something you might hear in the pub, it was worse. Maybe some people would make the assumption that you did, that it was just a bit of semi grown up chat, if they didn't see the 'proof' themselves.

Are you not the OP?

cte1111

larkrisetocandleford wrote: »

Are you not the OP?

Indeed. You know people can sometimes come round to understanding a different POV from that they started with.

lostinrates

cte1111 wrote: »

I guess that this post demonstrates why the head decided to include the transcript, as it makes it clear to us how far past boyfriends, boobs and fashion the conversation went. The language wasn't just ripe, e.g. something you might hear in the pub, it was worse. Maybe some people would make the assumption that you did, that it was just a bit of semi grown up chat, if they didn't see the 'proof' themselves.

I'm not surprised your head might be sensitive to critique in the face of the circumstances in which they are trying to run a decent school and set standards for children with parents like yours AND the others. Feeling unsupported, rather than needing to clarify, might make it a pretty thankless task.

Perhaps a further benefit might be that parents of rather less challenging children appreciate the challenges the school might be facing and why things that seem irrelevant to them are applied.

larkrisetocandleford

Why does that not sit right with me?

Dustykitten

I'm not sure sending out the transcript was the best way of handling this but I do think the Head needed to make parents fully aware of the extent of the incident as, like you, lots will be unaware just what 'some' children do know.

With the children being in their last term of primary school (assuming you are not in a middle school system) they will certainly start to hear a full range of thing when they move on to secondary school. Now is a good time to start addressing things.

As to the suspension I would assume the school have policies in place and that one of these has been breached, tbh that is not your business unless your child is involved.

I would hope that the school have looked into any safeguarding issues too; it could be children saying things they have overheard from older kids but that cannot be assumed.

fufu_banterwaite

I think this whole thread is a wind-up, that would seem the only explanation.

cte1111

larkrisetocandleford wrote: »

Why does that not sit right with me?

Perhaps you are so inflexible that you would never change your opinion?