from Amazon
Tuesday, April 26, 2011
Zero-tolerance policy = let’s behave like automatons
Here’s another 5-year rule that was well-intentioned but is inflexible:
The eligibility clock began ticking the moment Andrew walked through the front doors of Ottawa Technical, the Ontario Federation of School Athletic Associations says, and his five years are up.
There are no appeals.
The decision was a shock to Andrew, his teachers, his coaches and family, who have watched him come a long way only to be sidelined by bureaucracy.
...
The rule that excludes him is meant to promote inclusion: OFSAA has put a five-year limit on eligibility so that more students get a chance to participate.“We didn’t want to get into dealing with all kinds of different circumstances,” said Mr. Gellatly. “… We thought it was just better to have a clean rule, give them five years and beyond that give other kids the chance to participate.”
Andrew spent his first year at Ottawa Technical Learning Centre taking non-credit courses, bringing his academics up to speed in preparation for Grade 9. It was in his third year, on a whim, that he joined one of the track team’s practices.
So, they could have made the rule based on number of years actually participating, rather than number of years eligible to participate.
I totally understand that you want rules so they are applied consistently, and not have different rules for different people for different reasons. But, you are dealing with people where you can’t cover 100% of the scenarios, so you can’t just go zero-tolerance all the time. You need some leeway where you can document the exceptions, and then make sure those exceptions now become part of the case law. And if you have too many exceptions, then you need to update the rules.
Imagine: thinking and being human in creating and applying rules. No, let’s make it easy and inhuman and apply zero-tolerance rules.
Recent comments
Older comments
Page 1 of 344 pages 1 2 3 > Last »Complete Archive – By Category
Complete Archive – By Date