Jump to content

14 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

Filed: Citizen (apr) Country: Ecuador
Timeline
Posted (edited)

The article below is not presented as a news article in itself (hence the nonmatching thread title), but as an example of the literacy and writing style of the principal of a junior high school. The article is posted as context by which to evaluate those characteristics. On-topic observations about those characteristics, please.

Police: Intoxicated substitute teacher not arrested

Staff at South East Junior High called the police Thursday about a substitute teacher who appeared intoxicated, according to a message Principal Amber Boyd emailed to parents.

Boyd sent the email Thursday morning and said in the message that a plain-clothes officer "came to the building and confidentially verified that the individual was under the influence of alcohol."

The officer removed the substitute teacher from the building, and the district replaced the individual with another substitute teacher, the email says.

Iowa City Police Lieutenant Bill Campbell confirmed Friday that police did not arrest the substitute teacher.

Campbell said officers typically arrest only "a very, very small portion" of people they encounter who are intoxicated, and said each situation is different. He said he had no benchmark to describe how police would typically handle an intoxicated substitute teacher at a school because he cannot recall responding to a similar incident in the past.

The email to parents from Boyd reads as follows:

Dear Families,

I hope you are staying warm on this crisp winter day! I wanted to make you all aware of a situation that occurred in our art classroom this morning. It was brought to our attention that there was a substitute teacher in the building who appeared to be intoxicated. We responded immediately by contacting law enforcement as student safety is our first priority. A plain-clothes officer came to the building and confidentially verified that the individual was under the influence of alcohol. Appropriate measures were then taken by the officer to remove the substitute from the building and another licensed substitute was placed in the classroom. I am happy to report that all of our students were very respectful and true leaders in this situation. I am really proud to lead a building with great staff, an awesome leadership team, and amazing students. If you have any questions, please to not hesitate to contact the South East office at 688-1070. Thank you and stay warm.

Amber Boyd

Sgt. Scott Gaarde, public information officer for the Iowa City police, confirmed by email that the department received a call from the school at roughly 9:35 a.m., and police responded to a report of an "intoxicated pedestrian."

Jim Pedersen, Iowa City Community School District's interim chief human resources officer, said the district screens substitute teachers by running background checks and confirming they have valid teaching or substitute teaching licenses through the Iowa Board of Educational Examiners.

He said while the background check process would catch incidents such as drunken driving convictions, the process cannot prevent unforeseen incidents.

“These things are not 100 percent foolproof," Pedersen said.

Pedersen, who was also the district's human resources officer from roughly 2002 to 2013, said Thursday's incident is unique in his experience working for the district.

He said staff at South East handled the situation appropriately.

"Our main responsibility is the well-being of our students, and ... the administration at South East took immediate and correct action," Pedersen said.

UPDATE: The headline of this story was changed to clarify that it was a substitute teacher who appeared intoxicated and was removed from the school.

Edited by TBoneTX

06-04-2007 = TSC stamps postal return-receipt for I-129f.

06-11-2007 = NOA1 date (unknown to me).

07-20-2007 = Phoned Immigration Officer; got WAC#; where's NOA1?

09-25-2007 = Touch (first-ever).

09-28-2007 = NOA1, 23 days after their 45-day promise to send it (grrrr).

10-20 & 11-14-2007 = Phoned ImmOffs; "still pending."

12-11-2007 = 180 days; file is "between workstations, may be early Jan."; touches 12/11 & 12/12.

12-18-2007 = Call; file is with Division 9 ofcr. (bckgrnd check); e-prompt to shake it; touch.

12-19-2007 = NOA2 by e-mail & web, dated 12-18-07 (187 days; 201 per VJ); in mail 12/24/07.

01-09-2008 = File from USCIS to NVC, 1-4-08; NVC creates file, 1/15/08; to consulate 1/16/08.

01-23-2008 = Consulate gets file; outdated Packet 4 mailed to fiancee 1/27/08; rec'd 3/3/08.

04-29-2008 = Fiancee's 4-min. consular interview, 8:30 a.m.; much evidence brought but not allowed to be presented (consul: "More proof! Second interview! Bring your fiance!").

05-05-2008 = Infuriating $12 call to non-English-speaking consulate appointment-setter.

05-06-2008 = Better $12 call to English-speaker; "joint" interview date 6/30/08 (my selection).

06-30-2008 = Stokes Interrogations w/Ecuadorian (not USC); "wait 2 weeks; we'll mail her."

07-2008 = Daily calls to DOS: "currently processing"; 8/05 = Phoned consulate, got Section Chief; wrote him.

08-07-08 = E-mail from consulate, promising to issue visa "as soon as we get her passport" (on 8/12, per DHL).

08-27-08 = Phoned consulate (they "couldn't find" our file); visa DHL'd 8/28; in hand 9/1; through POE on 10/9 with NO hassles(!).

Filed: IR-1/CR-1 Visa Country: Canada
Timeline
Posted (edited)

Are you encouraging us to break the TOS (attacking a protected class of grammatically or keyboard challenged peoples) without first including the line "Moderator hat now off"?

Edited by Rob L

The content available on a site dedicated to bringing folks to America should not be promoting racial discord, euro-supremacy, discrimination based on religion , exclusion of groups from immigration based on where they were born, disenfranchisement of voters rights based on how they might vote.

horsey-change.jpg?w=336&h=265

Filed: Citizen (apr) Country: Ecuador
Timeline
Posted

[Moderator hat off, above] :lol:

06-04-2007 = TSC stamps postal return-receipt for I-129f.

06-11-2007 = NOA1 date (unknown to me).

07-20-2007 = Phoned Immigration Officer; got WAC#; where's NOA1?

09-25-2007 = Touch (first-ever).

09-28-2007 = NOA1, 23 days after their 45-day promise to send it (grrrr).

10-20 & 11-14-2007 = Phoned ImmOffs; "still pending."

12-11-2007 = 180 days; file is "between workstations, may be early Jan."; touches 12/11 & 12/12.

12-18-2007 = Call; file is with Division 9 ofcr. (bckgrnd check); e-prompt to shake it; touch.

12-19-2007 = NOA2 by e-mail & web, dated 12-18-07 (187 days; 201 per VJ); in mail 12/24/07.

01-09-2008 = File from USCIS to NVC, 1-4-08; NVC creates file, 1/15/08; to consulate 1/16/08.

01-23-2008 = Consulate gets file; outdated Packet 4 mailed to fiancee 1/27/08; rec'd 3/3/08.

04-29-2008 = Fiancee's 4-min. consular interview, 8:30 a.m.; much evidence brought but not allowed to be presented (consul: "More proof! Second interview! Bring your fiance!").

05-05-2008 = Infuriating $12 call to non-English-speaking consulate appointment-setter.

05-06-2008 = Better $12 call to English-speaker; "joint" interview date 6/30/08 (my selection).

06-30-2008 = Stokes Interrogations w/Ecuadorian (not USC); "wait 2 weeks; we'll mail her."

07-2008 = Daily calls to DOS: "currently processing"; 8/05 = Phoned consulate, got Section Chief; wrote him.

08-07-08 = E-mail from consulate, promising to issue visa "as soon as we get her passport" (on 8/12, per DHL).

08-27-08 = Phoned consulate (they "couldn't find" our file); visa DHL'd 8/28; in hand 9/1; through POE on 10/9 with NO hassles(!).

Posted

Grading on 'The Bell Curve' is a well worn topic in educational circles. In a best case scenario, half of the measured group falls below the median. As the median is 'bumped to the left' to achieve a nicely shaped bell curve, it is no longer a valid reference point. I am sure that the Junior High School Principal was on the 'right side' of her bell curve; it is not clear whether her median and my median are the same.

Thank God that Common Core is saving us from all the silly tweaking of bell curves. :rolleyes:

Filed: IR-1/CR-1 Visa Country: China
Timeline
Posted

Context? Tbone? No Way !

Contextually, your topic is silly. Ms. Boyd wrote an OK letter. Were you confused by 'I' vs 'Our' ? Elsewhere, I note this is an issue.

Sometimes my language usage seems confusing - please feel free to 'read it twice', just in case !
Ya know, you can find the answer to your question with the advanced search tool, when using a PC? Ditch the handphone, come back later on a PC, and try again.

-=-=-=-=-=R E A D ! ! !=-=-=-=-=-

Whoa Nelly ! Want NVC Info? see http://www.visajourney.com/wiki/index.php/NVC_Process

Congratulations on your approval ! We All Applaud your accomplishment with Most Wonderful Kissies !

 

Filed: Citizen (apr) Country: Ecuador
Timeline
Posted

Dear Families, [each addressee is ONE family -- consider the audience and not your own standpoint]

I hope you are staying warm on this crisp winter day! "I hope THAT you," and a silly intro I wanted to make you all [again, singular recipients] aware of a situation that occurred in our art classroom this morning. It was brought to our attention that there was a substitute teacher in the building who appeared to be intoxicated "that a substitute teacher appeared to be intoxicated" [wordy & redundant -- the art classroom is, one presumes, in the building] . We responded immediately by contacting law enforcement as student safety is our first priority "enforcement, because". A plain-clothes [typically one word] officer came to the building [last 4 words redundant] and confidentially [no, screamed it to the world] verified that the individual was under the influence of alcohol. Appropriate measures were then taken by the officer to remove the substitute ["substitute teacher"] from the building [what, the third mention of building?] and another licensed substitute [adjective again needs a noun to modify] was placed in the classroom. I am happy to report that all of our students were very respectful and true leaders in this situation [how, and relevance?]. I am really proud to lead a building [she's the chief custodian? where is the building being led?] with great staff, an awesome [insert teenage giggle] leadership team, and amazing students [unexplained hyperbole]. If you have any questions, please to [great proofreading] not hesitate to contact the South East office at 688-1070. Thank you and stay warm [gee; I'd have gone outside in my beach attire without this admonition].

Right, Bro D -- a truly OK letter.

06-04-2007 = TSC stamps postal return-receipt for I-129f.

06-11-2007 = NOA1 date (unknown to me).

07-20-2007 = Phoned Immigration Officer; got WAC#; where's NOA1?

09-25-2007 = Touch (first-ever).

09-28-2007 = NOA1, 23 days after their 45-day promise to send it (grrrr).

10-20 & 11-14-2007 = Phoned ImmOffs; "still pending."

12-11-2007 = 180 days; file is "between workstations, may be early Jan."; touches 12/11 & 12/12.

12-18-2007 = Call; file is with Division 9 ofcr. (bckgrnd check); e-prompt to shake it; touch.

12-19-2007 = NOA2 by e-mail & web, dated 12-18-07 (187 days; 201 per VJ); in mail 12/24/07.

01-09-2008 = File from USCIS to NVC, 1-4-08; NVC creates file, 1/15/08; to consulate 1/16/08.

01-23-2008 = Consulate gets file; outdated Packet 4 mailed to fiancee 1/27/08; rec'd 3/3/08.

04-29-2008 = Fiancee's 4-min. consular interview, 8:30 a.m.; much evidence brought but not allowed to be presented (consul: "More proof! Second interview! Bring your fiance!").

05-05-2008 = Infuriating $12 call to non-English-speaking consulate appointment-setter.

05-06-2008 = Better $12 call to English-speaker; "joint" interview date 6/30/08 (my selection).

06-30-2008 = Stokes Interrogations w/Ecuadorian (not USC); "wait 2 weeks; we'll mail her."

07-2008 = Daily calls to DOS: "currently processing"; 8/05 = Phoned consulate, got Section Chief; wrote him.

08-07-08 = E-mail from consulate, promising to issue visa "as soon as we get her passport" (on 8/12, per DHL).

08-27-08 = Phoned consulate (they "couldn't find" our file); visa DHL'd 8/28; in hand 9/1; through POE on 10/9 with NO hassles(!).

Posted

Dear Families, [each addressee is ONE family -- consider the audience and not your own standpoint] "Dear Families" is a perfectly acceptable salutation in the circumstances, as "Dear Friends," "Dear Colleagues" or "Dear Students" would be in any letter written to multiple recipients.

I hope you are staying warm on this crisp winter day! "I hope THAT you," and a silly intro In a relatively informal note such as this, there is no need to include "that" as a subordinating conjunction. It's clear from context. "Silly intro" is a value judgment. I wanted to make you all [again, singular recipients] again, multiple recipients intended aware of a situation that occurred in our art classroom this morning. It was brought to our attention ugh, no need for passive voice here that there was a substitute teacher in the building who appeared to be intoxicated "that actually who is preferable, because the author is speaking of one specific substitute teacher, and not a class of people, though "that" would be acceptable a substitute teacher appeared to be intoxicated" [wordy & redundant -- the art classroom is, one presumes, in the building] the inclusion of the location within the building might be relevant to some parents, if their children had art class on that day. Again, this is a value judgment and not a grammar issue. It isn't "wordy & [sic] redundant" depending on context. We responded immediately by contacting law enforcement as student safety is our first priority "enforcement, because" "as" is an acceptable conjunction where it introduces a subordinate clause. A plain-clothes [typically one word] yes, typically officer came to the building [last 4 words redundant] Why? Without "came to the building" the sentence makes no sense and confidentially [no, screamed it to the world] this is not a grammar issue verified that the individual was under the influence of alcohol. Appropriate measures were then taken ugh, more passive voice by the officer to remove the substitute ["substitute teacher"] it's a nominalized adjective that is familiar in everyday discourse from the building [what, the third mention of building?] again, this is not poor grammar or even poor writing, but merely your preference and another licensed substitute [adjective again needs a noun to modify] again, nominalized adjective was placed in the classroom. I am happy to report that all of our students were very respectful and true leaders in this situation [how, and relevance?] it's a dumb platitude, I agree. I am really proud to lead a building [she's the chief custodian? where is the building being led?] agreed that it's a use of metonymy that comes off poorly, but the intent is clear, at least to this fool with great staff, an awesome [insert teenage giggle] value judgment leadership team, and amazing students [unexplained hyperbole] acceptable in an informal note; value judgment. If you have any questions, please to [great proofreading] agreed not hesitate to contact the South East office at 688-1070. Thank you and stay warm [gee; I'd have gone outside in my beach attire without this admonition] value judgment.

Right, Bro D -- a truly OK letter.

It's an informal note that could have used a bit more proofreading; a formal tone is unnecessary, in my opinion. The repeated use of the passive voice is irritating, but this is fairly innocuous in the grand scheme of things.

larissa-lima-says-who-is-against-the-que

Filed: Citizen (apr) Country: Russia
Timeline
Posted

I have a supervisor that brings things like this to our staff meetings occasionally. She is a stickler for grammar, and wants to stress the need to proof-read communications that we originate in our day-to-day work life. Overall, this letter was informative, but is was poorly written and was in need of a proof read by someone else prior to distribution.

Visa Received : 2014-04-04 (K1 - see timeline for details)

US Entry : 2014-09-12

POE: Detroit

Marriage : 2014-09-27

I-765 Approved: 2015-01-09

I-485 Interview: 2015-03-11

I-485 Approved: 2015-03-13

Green Card Received: 2015-03-24 Yeah!!!

I-751 ROC Submitted: 2016-12-20

I-751 NOA Received:  2016-12-29

I-751 Biometrics Appt.:  2017-01-26

I-751 Interview:  2018-04-10

I-751 Approved:  2018-05-04

N400 Filed:  2018-01-13

N400 Biometrics:  2018-02-22

N400 Interview:  2018-04-10

N400 Approved:  2018-04-10

Oath Ceremony:  2018-06-11 - DONE!!!!!!!

Filed: IR-1/CR-1 Visa Country: China
Timeline
Posted

Dear Families,]snip]

Right, Bro D -- a truly OK letter.

nah - I was just yanking yer toilet chain, to see if'n you'd actually post the gross errors. Thankfully, Maven (The) made additional comments, so it's all good (on the commentaries).

I'm sorta proud of you for actually doing the work, posting the errors. Kudos ! [for once]

Sometimes my language usage seems confusing - please feel free to 'read it twice', just in case !
Ya know, you can find the answer to your question with the advanced search tool, when using a PC? Ditch the handphone, come back later on a PC, and try again.

-=-=-=-=-=R E A D ! ! !=-=-=-=-=-

Whoa Nelly ! Want NVC Info? see http://www.visajourney.com/wiki/index.php/NVC_Process

Congratulations on your approval ! We All Applaud your accomplishment with Most Wonderful Kissies !

 

Filed: IR-1/CR-1 Visa Country: Canada
Timeline
Posted

It's an informal note that could have used a bit more proofreading; a formal tone is unnecessary, in my opinion. The repeated use of the passive voice is irritating, but this is fairly innocuous in the grand scheme of things.

Microsoft Word frequently accuses me of writing in the passive voice. This did anything but make me passive. I am not saying I had anything to do with Clippys demise during my tenure at that company but I may know a shallow grave in the vicinity of Redmond....

Clippy.jpg

The content available on a site dedicated to bringing folks to America should not be promoting racial discord, euro-supremacy, discrimination based on religion , exclusion of groups from immigration based on where they were born, disenfranchisement of voters rights based on how they might vote.

horsey-change.jpg?w=336&h=265

Filed: Citizen (apr) Country: Ecuador
Timeline
Posted

This is a quick-&-dirty example of what I would have appreciated receiving:

---

Dear Parent,

This is to inform you of an incident at South East Junior High School this morning. A substitute Art teacher appeared to be intoxicated. A plainclothes police officer confirmed this suspicion. That teacher was removed from the building in appropriate fashion and was replaced by another substitute teacher, and the school day proceeded uneventfully.

Please feel free to call the school office at 688-1070 with any questions. Thank you for your attention to this message.

Respectfully,

Amber Boyd, Principal

06-04-2007 = TSC stamps postal return-receipt for I-129f.

06-11-2007 = NOA1 date (unknown to me).

07-20-2007 = Phoned Immigration Officer; got WAC#; where's NOA1?

09-25-2007 = Touch (first-ever).

09-28-2007 = NOA1, 23 days after their 45-day promise to send it (grrrr).

10-20 & 11-14-2007 = Phoned ImmOffs; "still pending."

12-11-2007 = 180 days; file is "between workstations, may be early Jan."; touches 12/11 & 12/12.

12-18-2007 = Call; file is with Division 9 ofcr. (bckgrnd check); e-prompt to shake it; touch.

12-19-2007 = NOA2 by e-mail & web, dated 12-18-07 (187 days; 201 per VJ); in mail 12/24/07.

01-09-2008 = File from USCIS to NVC, 1-4-08; NVC creates file, 1/15/08; to consulate 1/16/08.

01-23-2008 = Consulate gets file; outdated Packet 4 mailed to fiancee 1/27/08; rec'd 3/3/08.

04-29-2008 = Fiancee's 4-min. consular interview, 8:30 a.m.; much evidence brought but not allowed to be presented (consul: "More proof! Second interview! Bring your fiance!").

05-05-2008 = Infuriating $12 call to non-English-speaking consulate appointment-setter.

05-06-2008 = Better $12 call to English-speaker; "joint" interview date 6/30/08 (my selection).

06-30-2008 = Stokes Interrogations w/Ecuadorian (not USC); "wait 2 weeks; we'll mail her."

07-2008 = Daily calls to DOS: "currently processing"; 8/05 = Phoned consulate, got Section Chief; wrote him.

08-07-08 = E-mail from consulate, promising to issue visa "as soon as we get her passport" (on 8/12, per DHL).

08-27-08 = Phoned consulate (they "couldn't find" our file); visa DHL'd 8/28; in hand 9/1; through POE on 10/9 with NO hassles(!).

Filed: Other Country: England
Timeline
Posted (edited)

It was wordy so that the author could write more without saying more, giving the impression of being more transparent.

My greatest complaint is actually why the @*#( a principal of a school is so ineffective they need to call the police when a teacher is drunk. Seriously? Go talk to them, if they smell drunk, tell them to leave. What's the big deal? That's how a real leader would deal with this. Calling the cops is pitiful.

Edited by ExPatty

Good luck!

Posted

probably not the best idea to tell a drunk adult in a classroom full of kids to get out.. drive home. i don't know why the cops wouldn't take the teacher to the drunk tank, that's what drunk tanks are for.

Filed: Citizen (apr) Country: Ecuador
Timeline
Posted

The Phys Ed teachers or sports coaches probably could have achieved the same as did the cop.

06-04-2007 = TSC stamps postal return-receipt for I-129f.

06-11-2007 = NOA1 date (unknown to me).

07-20-2007 = Phoned Immigration Officer; got WAC#; where's NOA1?

09-25-2007 = Touch (first-ever).

09-28-2007 = NOA1, 23 days after their 45-day promise to send it (grrrr).

10-20 & 11-14-2007 = Phoned ImmOffs; "still pending."

12-11-2007 = 180 days; file is "between workstations, may be early Jan."; touches 12/11 & 12/12.

12-18-2007 = Call; file is with Division 9 ofcr. (bckgrnd check); e-prompt to shake it; touch.

12-19-2007 = NOA2 by e-mail & web, dated 12-18-07 (187 days; 201 per VJ); in mail 12/24/07.

01-09-2008 = File from USCIS to NVC, 1-4-08; NVC creates file, 1/15/08; to consulate 1/16/08.

01-23-2008 = Consulate gets file; outdated Packet 4 mailed to fiancee 1/27/08; rec'd 3/3/08.

04-29-2008 = Fiancee's 4-min. consular interview, 8:30 a.m.; much evidence brought but not allowed to be presented (consul: "More proof! Second interview! Bring your fiance!").

05-05-2008 = Infuriating $12 call to non-English-speaking consulate appointment-setter.

05-06-2008 = Better $12 call to English-speaker; "joint" interview date 6/30/08 (my selection).

06-30-2008 = Stokes Interrogations w/Ecuadorian (not USC); "wait 2 weeks; we'll mail her."

07-2008 = Daily calls to DOS: "currently processing"; 8/05 = Phoned consulate, got Section Chief; wrote him.

08-07-08 = E-mail from consulate, promising to issue visa "as soon as we get her passport" (on 8/12, per DHL).

08-27-08 = Phoned consulate (they "couldn't find" our file); visa DHL'd 8/28; in hand 9/1; through POE on 10/9 with NO hassles(!).

 

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
- Back to Top -

Important Disclaimer: Please read carefully the Visajourney.com Terms of Service. If you do not agree to the Terms of Service you should not access or view any page (including this page) on VisaJourney.com. Answers and comments provided on Visajourney.com Forums are general information, and are not intended to substitute for informed professional medical, psychiatric, psychological, tax, legal, investment, accounting, or other professional advice. Visajourney.com does not endorse, and expressly disclaims liability for any product, manufacturer, distributor, service or service provider mentioned or any opinion expressed in answers or comments. VisaJourney.com does not condone immigration fraud in any way, shape or manner. VisaJourney.com recommends that if any member or user knows directly of someone involved in fraudulent or illegal activity, that they report such activity directly to the Department of Homeland Security, Immigration and Customs Enforcement. You can contact ICE via email at Immigration.Reply@dhs.gov or you can telephone ICE at 1-866-347-2423. All reported threads/posts containing reference to immigration fraud or illegal activities will be removed from this board. If you feel that you have found inappropriate content, please let us know by contacting us here with a url link to that content. Thank you.
×
×
  • Create New...