Lauren+Kang+New+Afterschool+Policy

Pre-writing New Pre-writing

=Rough Draft=

At three o clock in the afternoon, when the bell for dismissal rings, once can often hear student talking to each other about what they are doing after-school. With students full of excitement, relief, and stress about homework one can take a sneak peak on what their after-school schedule is like. But so far from the few months of the year 2009-2010 in KIS, we hear less cheerful chitchat of the student but are simply left with big KIS building with no sign of students other than the library area and few others. Due to the new after-school policy enforced by the school administration, students have lost a lot of their freedom in the school. Because the new after-school policy is unfair, unjustified and unreasonable to both the staff and the students, it is the best plan that the school should return to their old after-school policy.

Firstly, the reason why the school should reconsider this policy is due to its rapid and sudden change imposed on the school. On the first day of school when the students returned from their long summer vacation, the school’s justification for this rule or policy was apparently due to the lack of responsibility the students showed last year. Just like the British troops back then imposing unfair treaties against the colonists in a rapid transition, the students have been overwhelmed and confused with these policies. Despite the school’s explanation for this new rule, is it real still fair for us students to accept this without any prior notice or warnings? Last year the students had no idea whether this was even an issue. Just like the Korean policy, why couldn’t have the school given the student prior notice about how serious the problem is and given us the chance to make up. Rather than taking time to notify us the serious consequence we will face by continuing such actions, the school didn’t even give the student body a chance to redeem their selves and simply took away their right without any communication. If there were some serious cases of disrespect and lack of responsibility, why couldn’t the school enforce harsher punishments for those students? Was is really fair for those students who kept their words and rules to lose their right and privileges because of the ones who didn’t? Again, was it really fair for us students to simply embrace this sudden change of policy without any prior notice or warning?

As mentioned in the above statements, due to the lack of prior notice of the school administration, the school also restricted the students themselves to prove to the administration that they are capable of keeping their words and able to follow the rules they have given. All other animals in this world usually leave from their parent’s control or hand under the age of 30. By sending off their cubs or babies in the early year, it allows the animals to grow a sense of responsibility they have to keep and learn the necessary steps in order to survive. Just like that by limiting the privileges of students during after-school on the school ground, it only prevents the students from learning the idea of responsibility and only shows that the school is simply treating the high-school students as 3 year old kids under the hand of their mother 24/7 without any freedom. By enforcing stricter punishments for one student that disrespected the policy or was not responsible, it will allow the students realize the sense of responsibility they gain as an older being and how important it is for any humans being to keep these values.

When the administration was describing this new policy to the students in the first few weeks of school, they made it sound like that it isn’t such as big change from last year. On the other hand, the changes we feel as a school body is enormous and these changes that we observe are not really beneficial for not only the students but also to the school faculty members. For students, because of the rule that students are not allowed to stay in the school ground after 3 without any permission and supervision of a faculty, it has limited their range and area for them to work on certain projects dealing with filming and podcasts. Also even though the policy states that students are able to stay after school in the library until 5, this does not make up for the space or area students need in order for certain projects to be accomplished. From these restrictions the school imposed on students, the students have often met up at cafes outside for tasks or projects dealing group work. But what the school should realize from this increasing number is that it increases their chances or risks of dangers from the outside. If something were to happen to these student working out side of school, who’s responsibility is it? Secondly, not only is this policy unreasonable for students but also for the faculty staff also. Because students are unable to simply stay in rooms without the teacher’s supervision, it cuts down or limits the hours teachers they themselves can enjoy or have after-school. Is it really justified for the teachers to loose their free hours or time after school just to supervise students that don’t even require the help of these teachers?

Yes, we all know that the policy was not created simply just to increase the annoyance or irritation of the student but was for a good cause that the school thought of. But despite its best effort, the policy is just simply to rough edged and not ready to really be imposed. Although the school believes that it is for the students and the faculty, maybe reconsidering or at least revising the current policy will make the overall student body satisfied. Rather than trying to simply eliminate the problem, it is necessary for the school to find the cause of these problems and try to eliminate it by taking a considerable amount time and thought that will not bring a sudden rush of confusion but will actually be practical with less disagreement and disapprovals from people in every group of the school body.

Document: [[file:Persuasive Speech Lauren.doc]]
Finding The Midpoint At three o clock in the afternoon, when the bell for dismissal rings, one can often hear student talking to each other about what they are doing after-school. With students full of excitement, relief, and stress about homework one can take a sneak peak on what their after-school schedule is like. But now we hear less of these cheerful chitchats. This year at KIS,, in order to keep the school ground free from trouble and danger, the school has enforced a new after-school policy that states that no student is able to stay after-school unless is supervised by faculty member at all times and that students may stay in the library area but must remain there until 5’o clock sharp unless is picked up by their parents or decides to leave earlier. Despite the school’s legitimate reason behind this policy, due several different problems, it is urgent that the school revise the new after-school policy into a policy that accommodate the school’s position and the students’ needs.
 * Final Draft**

Firstly, the reason why the school should reconsider this policy is due to the lack of school’s communication about this policy. On the first day of school when the students returned from their long summer vacation, without any prior warnings or notice, the students simply had no choices but to follow this policy. Just like the British troops in America imposed unfair treaties against the colonists in a rapid transition, many students were confused about his new policy but had no choice but to follow it. Without any proper notice or prior inform about the specific reasons behind the policy, is it really fair for the students to simply embrace this sudden change? Were the short 5-minute meetings about this policy really an enough time for students to adopt and get hang of this new rule? Rather than simply making students deal with the confusion on their own, the school could have provided a Grace period for adjustments and adaptation to take place. Through a longer duration of time to impose the policy to the school might have decreased the number of confusion among the students and allow them to adopt better to the new environment.

Secondly, not only was the communication about this new policy lacking between the administration and the students but the policy it self was not thoroughly planned out. All other animals in this world usually leave from their parent’s control or hand under the age of 30. By sending off their cubs or babies in the early year, it allows the animals to grow a sense of responsibility they have to keep and learn the necessary steps in order to survive. Just like through these policies, it doesn’t help students grow their responsibility but by limiting the privileges of students after-school, the policy only prevents the students from growing their responsibility and shows that the school is simply treating the high-school students as 3 year old kids under the hand of their mother 24/7 without any sense of maturity. Also because the policy was not thoroughly planned, it took away the privileges of the students who properly followed these rules, due to the students who did not. Instead of taking away all the privileges at once, by enforcing stricter punishments for each student that disrespected the privilege, it is fair for students who kept these rules and will allow the students to realize their sense of responsibility they have and the serious consequences of not keeping these policies set up by the school. Doesn’t it sound more fair and right to enforce stricter punishments for the students who misused their freedom or privilege of after-school than taking away the all the privilege of the whole student or the community?

Last but not least, despite the school’s words that the new after-school policy won’t affect the spaces students need to use for activities or assignments, the new policy was significantly different. Without any adult supervision, students are not allowed do projects or assignments such as filming in different areas or rooms throughout the school. This led students to meet their friends, partner, or group members outside in places like public café or shop. But doesn’t the school see that the new after-school policy increased the risk of danger towards students’ safety? And it has been proven true that there has been an increase in students working outside the school for school assignments because they feel that the school ground it too limited and restricted. Also, because the teachers or faculty member are required to stay for the whole time after-school just to supervise, it only takes away the personal time the faculty members have for themselves. Even the library area, even though the students are allowed to stay after for assignments until 5, because the library is used often as an area for teachers to have their meetings, it shows a high chance of students getting moved out. Again, because of the new after-school policy, it significantly decreased the necessary spaces students were allowed to use for their assignments or school related activities.

Even though the school enforcement of this new policy is in order to keep students from trouble and danger on school ground, due to the lack of communication, lack of thorough planning of rules, and restriction of the school spaces necessary for students, the new after-school policy should be revised. By revising the policy, the administration should focus on accommodating the school’s position but also meeting the students’ needs. By finding the half way between the desires of each side, it will allow a more unified and reasonable school for students.
 * Document:** [[file:Persuasive+Speech+final+Lauren.doc]]