Is it fair that I was excluded from college?

[FnG]magnolia · 4 Apr 2014 at 00:37

Sperglord doesn't understand rules, more news at eleven.

Castiel · 4 Apr 2014 at 00:57

Has he been expelled yet?

Castiel · 4 Apr 2014 at 00:59

Skidder said:
In my day, if you wanted to get expelled you took a load of drugs and booze and shagged in public. Sometimes I despair of the younger generations. This is the lamest rebellion ever.

In my day that was generally expected behaviour...getting expelled normally required something more explosive....

NirK · 4 Apr 2014 at 01:03

Just don't do the BSOD "joke" then? a) its not funny b) don't do it again, not ****** rocket science is it.

Domo · 4 Apr 2014 at 01:24

Crikey you lot are coming down hard on this kid. Some unnecessarily patronising posts.
OP screwed up a few times - so what.

I remember when I first started working in IT (on a support desk) and the things we used to install or run on each others machines as pranks. EXEs which re-mapped keys or 'dissolved' the screen image over time - makes me shudder now. That was about 15 years ago mind when security didn't rank as high as it does now.

Good luck OP - hope it works out OK for you.

Nitefly · 4 Apr 2014 at 01:44

Adsta said:
....

So yea.... not so smart now are you !!!

What is wrong with you?!

fail at the internets · 4 Apr 2014 at 01:47

Back when I was in college pranks were funny.

Malc · 4 Apr 2014 at 04:05

OP. Have you looked into the legality of the conditions of your exclusion? Without knowing the details of your school and the full correspondence, it's difficult to comment, but there are conditions and a duty of care that the school has to meet. If you're serious about your education then you should ensure these are met.

Admiral Huddy · 4 Apr 2014 at 08:22

Woden said:
This attitude is one of your problems.

I have to agree.

MooMoo444 · 4 Apr 2014 at 10:04

Ivee said:
I am not going to apply for a ****** job just cause they wont let me back in.

Not worth taking the holier than thou attitude with jobs when you're out on your backside with nothing. Just take whatevers available.

Haggisman · 4 Apr 2014 at 10:45

Malc said:
OP. Have you looked into the legality of the conditions of your exclusion? Without knowing the details of your school and the full correspondence, it's difficult to comment, but there are conditions and a duty of care that the school has to meet. If you're serious about your education then you should ensure these are met.

Not really relevant I wouldn't have thought. It's not a school, it's a college, so the education they are providing is not compulsory, rather they are providing a service, which is subject to a contract. The OP has repeatedly breached this contract, so I would say the college are well within their rights to terminate it based on this.

Malc · 4 Apr 2014 at 12:28

Haggisman said:
Not really relevant I wouldn't have thought. It's not a school, it's a college, so the education they are providing is not compulsory, rather they are providing a service, which is subject to a contract. The OP has repeatedly breached this contract, so I would say the college are well within their rights to terminate it based on this.

What the OP has done is irrelevant to my point. The college have suspended him for roughly 3 weeks. They haven't made a decision upon his termination and therefore he is still a pupil. They will therefore have to meet certain conditions to suspend him. If I was a parent and my child had been suspended, in order to forward their education I would want to ensure that all the conditions had been met. A quick google gives this guidance https://www.gov.uk/school-discipline-exclusions/exclusions

Judging by the fact that they call the .exe a Virus suggests that their attention to detail is poor so no doubt they've failed to exclude him correctly. The article suggests that they need to provide full time education at day 6, they also need to demonstrate a procedure to challenge and they also need to give a duration of exclusion. I'd also want to know why it's 3 weeks.

I would say failure to pursue this demonstrates a lack of interest in the pupil's education on the parent's behalf and therefore further weakens his case.

Even if that policy doesn't exist because it's a college and not a school, I'd still be ringing up to query.

[FnG]magnolia · 4 Apr 2014 at 12:37

I want to hear more about the isolation chamber and the medication because so far we have a whiny, attention-seeking teen and that is just not going to cut it because that is all of them.

Come on OP - give us something to work with!

Haggisman · 4 Apr 2014 at 12:48

Malc said:
What the OP has done is irrelevant to my point. The college have suspended him for roughly 3 weeks. They haven't made a decision upon his termination and therefore he is still a pupil. They will therefore have to meet certain conditions to suspend him. If I was a parent and my child had been suspended, in order to forward their education I would want to ensure that all the conditions had been met. A quick google gives this guidance https://www.gov.uk/school-discipline-exclusions/exclusions

Judging by the fact that they call the .exe a Virus suggests that their attention to detail is poor so no doubt they've failed to exclude him correctly. The article suggests that they need to provide full time education at day 6, they also need to demonstrate a procedure to challenge and they also need to give a duration of exclusion. I'd also want to know why it's 3 weeks.

I would say failure to pursue this demonstrates a lack of interest in the pupil's education on the parent's behalf and therefore further weakens his case.

Again, the information you've posted is about school. I.e. compulsory education. I'm pretty sure the college isn't under any obligation to continue to provide a service to a customer who has repeatedly breached their contract. Especially when it's to the detriment of other customers.

Malc said:
Even if that policy doesn't exist because it's a college and not a school, I'd still be ringing up to query.

What is there to query? They've been given a date for a hearing, and while I agree that 3 weeks is a long time to wait, I don't think the OP is really in a position where she wants to rock the boat.

PMKeates · 4 Apr 2014 at 12:55

Excluded for writing a piece of VB code and faking a BSOD?

Ridiculous. You should be commended for doing it in VB rather than with a screenshot.

Haggisman · 4 Apr 2014 at 12:57

PMKeates said:
Excluded for writing a piece of VB code and faking a BSOD?

Ridiculous.

You're missing the part about "repeatedly" and "after signing a contract to say they wouldn't do it again".

PMKeates · 4 Apr 2014 at 13:00

Haggisman said:
You're missing the part about "repeatedly" and "after signing a contract to say they wouldn't do it again".

'Contract of behaviour'? Please, give me a break.

"you sent an illegal virus attachment to a member of staff and endangered the security of the college network." - total nonsense.

The college is crap.

Theophany · 4 Apr 2014 at 13:01

PMKeates said:
'Contract of behaviour'? Please, give me a break.

?

Destination · 4 Apr 2014 at 13:05

Ivee said:
Would an apology definately work? I have a slight feeling I've gone way overboard by now and if I have what other options do I have? I have done it twice so it should be hammered into me by now.

From the way you are speaking, it seems you are only now realising after being excluded that you might well have overstepped the line.
You should realise that line isn't actually meant to be crossed at all, not even for a laugh.
Hilarious that you don't comprehend the mavity of this situation.

I am glad I don't have to deal with you or similar students.
Back when violence was an option, I am reasonably sure most would have used it as a first line on you.
A kick up the arse at the start of each day to remind you not to step out of line, then one at lunch as a further reminder.

Malc · 4 Apr 2014 at 13:06

Haggisman said:
Again, the information you've posted is about school. I.e. compulsory education. I'm pretty sure the college isn't under any obligation to continue to provide a service to a customer who has repeatedly breached their contract. Especially when it's to the detriment of other customers.

Why not ring up to find out? You're not certain, I'm not certain. Only the college will be.

Haggisman said:
What is there to query? They've been given a date for a hearing, and while I agree that 3 weeks is a long time to wait, I don't think the OP is really in a position where she wants to rock the boat.

Like I said, the offense has no bearing on what the OP is entitled to do. It's irrelevant.

Put it this way. What happens if the OP is allowed to stay but hasn't been given work for 3 weeks? Upon return, they will be 3 weeks behind. How is that just? The policy I linked to suggests that from day 6 work must be provided. Presumably to reduce disruption. Even if that policy doesn't apply to the "college", it looks like good practice so it's likely to be in the college's procedures or at least something they'd agree to.

Ultimately at work, people are supposed to be professional and responsible. I wouldn't like to think that the heads of schools/colleges are any different. Therefore this won't be personal, and the head wont see it as "rocking the boat". Calling to ensure the best for a pupil is the responsible thing to do.