I just wanted to add that my high school offered an accelerated program for students that allowed us to take classes at our state university for credit. I was taking specialized courses in chemistry at 14 and one of my best friends had enough credits to graduate with their bachelor’s in chemical engineering by 16. I was honestly surprised to see people question that part of Tamburro’s article.
At the same time, I was bothered by her assertion that the additional MAAP policies are “destructive” to relationships between minors and Applicable Adults. It played into the false narrative that the new polices are essentially banning interactions between minors and adults. As people have stated previously, these rules are commonplace in most settings that cater to minors or have a clear power imbalance (such as universities). You can still text your trainer/coach - just have another Applicable Adult cc’d on the message. Most of the issues I’ve seen brought up are either false (for e.g. “My 18 year old amateur athlete son can’t be friends with his 17 year old teammates! These rules are ruining lives.”) or can be addressed with relative ease. While I can understand some of the confusion and concerns about the policies, I can’t seem to wrap my head around the extreme paranoia regarding specific situations.
@YankeeDuchess I have to challenge your comment about the role of riders and trainers in the aforementioned scenario. Family dynamics can be very complicated. There are several cases that I am aware of in which a confidant of the survivor reported the abuse to the parents immediately (without warning the survivor) which had disastrous results.
I remember working on one case in which a 14 year old boy was being sexually abused by his male coach (who was in his 30’s). The boy ended up telling an assistant coach at the gym, who in turn called the boy’s parents and the authorities - in that order. The boy ended up being kicked out of his home for being “gay” (he identifies as straight). He also ended up lying to the police in fear that admitting to the abuse would just “ruin [his] life more”. We had another case in which a coach was sexually harassing a 16 year old girl. When an older athlete contacted her parents, they blamed her for “tempting” the coach and grounded her for a few weeks. He ended up sexually assaulting her a few months later. She never came forward to the police in fear of her parent’s wrath.
Sexual misconduct is incredibly traumatizing and strips the survivor of their power. My colleagues and I always try to avoid behaviors that make a survivor feel powerless. When working with minors, we always try to encourage them to go to their parents themselves. In a case like Tamburro’s, I could easily see her feeling betrayed by her trainers for going behind her back and refusing to corroborate the claims if they decided to immediately contact her parents. By allowing her to come forward on her own terms, the adults were able to address an abusive situation without stripping the survivor of their free will & power. Their decision wouldn’t be appropriate in every situation, however. It’s all a balancing act.
@supernatural If you are going to publish an opinion piece on how the MAAP policies affect young riders, I think you have an obligation to represent the MAAP policies at least roughly accurately, whether you are 17 or 57. I think she grossly misrepresented the policies as having the effect of banning all communication and interaction between juniors and adults, which is simply not true; and described the texting rule as a big burden, when adding an adult to the text thread is trivially easy.
Perhaps I was wrong and cynical in assuming the misrepresentation was intentional. But intentional or not, the misrepresentation makes the MAAP policies look constricting and burdensome, when they are not.
@FiSk123 … It’s true that there is some misunderstanding of the specifics of the MAAP policies in Tamburro’s op ed piece. But having read the policies myself, it does seem to me that they are written such that they discourage interaction between kids and adults outside of organized activities, and the same policies apply regardless of whether the adult is a coach or trainer or a fellow student/boarder at the barn. Essentially, it paints all adults in the role of a coach/teacher/authority figure and implies that interactions between adults and kids should generally be “business only,” and I’m not convinced that is an unambiguously positive thing.
No, it isn’t truly that ‘difficult’ to include parents/other adults in a text message, or to just ask to use the kid’s own phone if she wants video taken of her round. But mandating that all interactions between kids and adults should occur in a similar context to those at school or a workplace (which admittedly is likely a good policy for trainers, as that IS their workplace) is likely to impact healthy friendships that may develop between adults in the sport and young riders, such as those Tamburro described in the article with her fellow boarders. And those friendships with adults who aren’t authority figures can be very helpful if a kid ends up in a tough situation.
@FiSk123 - I am the poster who questioned Tamburros account of a high school engineering class.
You are correct, there are advanced academic opportunities available to gifted high school students that do actually allow motivated kids to study topics, graduate early, etc.
But this writer is 17… and her story involves a high school engineering class she took when she was 15. Her words. Not mine. Furthermore… the story involves bullying that happened in a classroom environment - boys in the class made up a crude song about the girl and her horse, presumably sang it (or verbalized the song in some other taunting manner), and the whole incident was upsetting and humiliating enough to her that she ended up in a sophomore counselors office crying about it. Repeatedly. And then says she was forced to drop out of the class.
Look… I have skepticism regarding the basic facts that are laid out in this story. Was there an actual IN PERSON engineering class offered in a high school to 15 year olds? Advanced academic courses in high school have titles like “AP Calculus AB”, “AP Computer Science”, “AP Physics” etc…
What was the title of this course?
If it was truly an engineering class and offered as some sort of dual enrollment type of opportunity… what about Title IX? It would apply here I would think.
I do understand your points about complicated family dynamics. I come from exactly that sort of a family, and was unsupported by my own parents when I tried to report abuse to them as a teenager. Abuse that happened to me and involved another family member. But back to Tamburro’s story. I do not understand why her parents would not be informed of her being bullied in school, to such a degree, that she actually dropped a class that is presumably part of an advanced academic curriculum as a high school sophomore. People with kids currently applying to college to competitive engineering programs know that this would be a terrible thing for a young person. It would be reflected on their high school transcripts and negatively impact them when applying to colleges… that is all VERY competitive these days. So why are her parents being kept in the dark by the school? If the answer is that she isn’t really focused on competitive academics and college admissions, etc etc… then I struggle even more with the whole “engineering class” for a 15 year old.
The story is problematic. I want to support the young person who is now in a VERY vulnerable position having had this letter nationally published… but I think it’s all problematic and I think the letter should have been thoroughly checked out prior to publishing, and I am wondering if it was. It doesn’t seem to me like it was. It might just be a matter of a number of details and the way the story was written… but there are major questions that are valid about this story.
Anyone who wants to review my earlier posts on this thread can do so. I am a supporter of Safe Sport, and a supporter of victims in general. But I find this letter to be problematic. In many respects.
I’m not sure why you find the idea of a high school engineering class so hard to believe. A picture in the article references the Arizona hunter/jumper association so I assume she is in Arizona. A quick Google search shows that the University of Arizona has an introduction to engineering class that is taught in 35 high schools across Arizona and California. http://engineering.arizona.edu/k12/k12_102_HS.
I also don’t find the rest of her story unbelievable. I find it sad, but not surprising that a high school didn’t adequately respond to a girl who was being sexually harassed by boys in her class. There are tons of stories of sexual harassment and worse out there where the institutions don’t respond well.
Regarding why why she dropped the class - perhaps she and her parents thought her emotional well being was more important than her potential future college applications.
I am all for the USEF, Chronicle, whomever publishing varying opinions.
I find the story perhaps exaggerated (because there are odd parts that don’t make sense) for multiple reasons, however, the author still does not clearly understand the rules or boundaries in their entirety. But then goes and writes a letter to go public.
This is the most concerning to me. Adults like BN or other adults either willfully or ignorantly muddying the waters regarding rules etc is expected. Now kids are showing they don’t understand or are repeating what they have heard adults in their circle say.
They DO have engineering classes at young ages now. It’s actually pretty cool, I taught lessons at a riding camp to some kids who were telling me about them, and these kids were like 12, 13. It’s not complex principles but basics. And when I was in college we did a lot of outreach to grade schools to teach them engineering basics (cool stuff like rocketry and coding).
And even in college, boys are still stupid. So I absolutely believe that a group of boys made up a stupid song, and I doubt they were doing it in front of the teacher. None of that story seemed weird to me.
Can someone describe what healthy friendship are between an adult and a kid? My son is in his late 20’s and I rode at boarding facilities with adults and kids. I would see myself as a role model for the kids, however, there was no relationship outside of the barn. I would talk to the kids when I was there, but I would never call them at their home, nor would I think about sending them a text. Did I drive a kid to the store and buy them a drink and food, yes, but that is not what I call a friendship.
I did not have a “relationship” with my son’s friends. I was a parental figure not a friend. My stepdaughter told me her mom’s friend invited her to spend the weekend at her house. This woman was in her 30’s, my stepdaughter was 16, her mom was 50. I found this weird and I was very uncomfortable with it. A 30 year old should not be looking for friendship with a teenager.
Technology has created ways to communicate that did not exist 25, 30 40 years ago, and with it, kids/people have developed a need to constantly interact with others. When I was a junior, if your lesson was at 10, you were ready for it at 10. If they were running late, you walked the horse around until they were ready. Today, the trainer needs to text the kid to say they will 15 minutes late. Does 15 minutes really make that big of a difference? I wonder what percentage of the text messages sent are actually important or necessary?
So, I’m gonna side with those that said you pretty much just called this kid a liar on an international bulletin board. Not cool. And way too similar to the nitpicking of irrelevant details to try and disprove an assault victim’s claim, which is the height of irony.
I think what is rubbing folks the wrong way about the article is that it takes opinions & assumptions, presents them as facts, and skips any scientific process in the middle.
“Although the additions were all added in good spirit, they’re destructive to relationships and are likely to be ineffective.” Assumption.
"If you really think about it, this is not protecting children. This is protecting the organizations that make the rules. "
Opinion. Not without some merit, but still entirely opinion and that should be qualified.
“The devil is in the details of the MAAP policies” As is the angel, and this statement makes it sound like someone has actually gone through the process of clinically evaluating the policies, played out all hypotheticals, and is presenting a fair & unbiased report, which it is not.
Finally, I pushed back HEAVILY on the story about catching kids falling off ponies, and my main point is this:
Violating a MAAP policy is not a SS sanctionable offense. They are best practices, designed to elevate professionalism across the board (sorely needed in this sport BTW), and protect both children AND TRAINERS. You do not get sat down for not copying another adult on a text. You do not get sat down for repositioning a rider’s leg. You do not get sat down for catching a child coming off a pony. You get sat down for claims of abuse & misconduct, at which point these suggested guidelines and your adherence to them will be assessed.
Therefore, anyone & everyone on the “But what about false allegations destroying trainer lives?!?!” train should be following MAAP policies to a Tee just to keep up their own pretenses. I would expect more moderate minds, that are confident that their behavior is above board, will be adopting the policies as the best they can and in accordance to their clients & real-life situations.
(Side Note: VHM, you’ve said repeatedly that the forum keeps eating your posts when you include links… I don’t ever have this problem - anyone else? Thinking your issue is probably within your own system and not the COTH software.)
The link to this course in Arizona public schools is helpful and does explain the whole “high school engineering” class issue… possibly. However, the class is (per its own description) only for high school juniors and seniors, and students who are at least currently in pre-Calculus. It also is for students who plan on pursuing an engineering degree in college while attending a public University in the Arizona state system. This is all in the course description you linked.
So I’m still wondering, why was the author in THIS class, if it was this class, as a high school sophomore? A possible explanation is that she’s a very bright and very motivated student, got special permission to do so, was already taking advanced math ahead of schedule (at least Pre-Calculus as a high school sophomore, and she planned on pursuing an engineering degree at an Arizona University at the time. That’s possible. You are correct.
But that means she would have to have been a student who was actually INTENSELY focused on her transcript and college prospects…
As to an “institution” not responding to sexual harassment well? Yup - that happens. But the author’s story isn’t about s college… it’s about a high school. One class in a high school. A class that would have a pretty low student teacher ratio (that’s typically the case with classes for kids who are future engineering types… ) - my guess is maximum 20:1. The kids taking the class would likely all be into advanced academics, and pretty studious. This class is not going to have the same dynamics as a study hall with a lot of “jocks” in it. Nope. The kids in this class or going to be “geeks.”
So I am perplexed as to how the classroom environment degraded to a point where it involved boys singing and jeering INCREDIBLY crude things in the manner she described. Her story leads a reader to presume that her only choice was to drop out of the class if she wanted to escape this sexist and abusive classroom environment. I have some skepticism about this. Because that is not a typical classroom environment for kids involved in advanced academics. Not kids interested in going on to study engineering. Not at all.
It is VERY typical for kids who think they want to pursue engineering to drop out of that course of study their first year of college. Engineering programs have VERY high rates of attrition. The classes are typically tough. And the program of study is simply not for everyone. So it wouldn’t surprise me if that was the case in this “intro to engineering” class offered to High school students in Arizona as well. I’m not alleging that is what did actually happen with the author… I’m just saying that would fit with the real world experience of a lot of people who THINK they want to be engineers, but then find the actual program of study to be a poor fit for them, and really stressful.
Additionally, there is a significant social push in high schools across the country to get more girls involved in STEM classes, and to get them to pursue STEM programs in college. It’s a frequently discussed thing in high schools across the country. So I am a bit curious about this whole story involving a high school engineering class, sexist males, and a young girl being forced to drop it. Because that is directly at odds with what is happening in high schools across America right now. There is a concerted effort to SUPPORT young women interested in pursuing engineering.
@RugBug pointed out earlier that I got the timeline wrong in an earlier post. I went back and re-read the op Ed, and she is right about that. So apparently Tamburro dropped the class because of the bullying, but didn’t feel she could talk to her mother about it. So she talked to adults at the barn and her riding coach instead. Who then presumably encouraged her to talk to her mother. Who then encouraged her to talk to a high school counselor. We can only assume after she spoke with the counselor, there still wasn’t an acceptable resolution, and she did not return to this class. Because the whole op Ed revolves around the statement that she was “forced” to drop the class.
Aside from that lack of resolution striking me as odd, given the aforementioned push nationwide to encourage young women to pursue studies in the STEM fields,
this timeline also means that she presumably dropped this class or simply cut it for several days? Before meeting with the counselor? without anyone at her high school informing her parents. That’s also odd. Add to it the fact that IF she was enrolled in this class as a high school sophomore, it would have been because she was advanced academically? And already focused on doing an engineering program in college. High school teachers typically notice when kids like that - kids who got special permission to be in an advanced class a year or two earlier than all the other students in the class - start cutting it. or drop it altogether. These are minors. And the kids in this class are all college bound, future engineering types. Teachers tend to take an extra interest in kids like this and try and support them academically.
See what I’m saying? There are still some questions with this story. It doesn’t make sense that the school failed to notice what had happened, and the only place Tamburro could turn to for support were the adults at the barn.
If we accept what was written in the op Ed, Tamburro’s high school can only be described as at BEST, a pretty poorly run place. Where bullying goes unchecked, and young females pursuing advanced academics and STEM tracks are marginalized, and parents aren’t notified when 15 year olds cut class, or drop classes. This is possible. But it’s also possible that there is more to the story than she shared in her op Ed, and that her published statement regarding being “forced” to drop out of an engineering class because of sexist bullying that went unchecked isn’t the entire story.
That’s a more diplomatic and gentle way of phrasing it than my first post. I’m not trying to attack the 17 year old girl. But I do think it’s noteworthy that there are issues with her interpretation of MAAP rules and guidelines as well, and that she has provided a distorted version of those guidelines in the context of this story… which also seems distorted or stretched in some manner.
Furthermore, I’d like to take COTH to task for their absolute failure to provide any sort of coverage on this issue. For four weeks and 105 pages they’ve allowed us to just flail in the wind of supposition and made zero effort to obtain & provide us with actual facts. 33 days since their sole article on Rob’s death that I have been waiting for them to do their journalistic duty, and all we got was an OpEd full of more supposition.
Highly doubt they’re going to do one, at least not one like you describe. Not to denigrate COTH but I would not classify it as anything like “investigative journalism.” They serve a different (more entertainment-oriented) function.
Ok ok ok - I get it. There are course offerings available to high schoolers that are essentially intro to engineering courses.
I also did pick apart her op Ed. And messed up her timeline.
But I did not call the young person a liar. Nope. I didn’t go there. I made errors… but don’t didn’t type that. I did point out that there are issues with the story however.
For those of you who reflexively accept her story as written, and have emphasized that she is a real person… indeed she is. She lives in Arizona. It’s not hard to look up the public high school she likely attends. Her op Ed (Nationally published) stated that she was FORCED to drop out of an engineering class as a high school sophomore because sexist bullying that she reported to a school counselor went unchecked in a classroom. This was stated in print multiple times. We can all interpret what being FORCED to drop out of a class meant… but the letter that was published is a story about a 15 year old female student being denied a significant educational opportunity, because she wasn’t willing to accept a classroom environment that involved humiliating, graphic and verbally abusive bullying.
There is not only a real writer of this op Ed. There is also a real teacher of that class, a real counselor who works at that school, and a real principal in charge of that school. All of whom could be disciplined professionally if the situation is as she describes it in her published op Ed.
I’ll accept that my earlier nit picking was out of order. She’s a 17 year old girl. But surely others can see that it’s a problem if this story, as published, is exaggerated in some way? Many of you are focusing on how she exaggerated/misinterpreted the MAAP guidelines. COTH could look that up, but published her letter regardless. So what about her story regarding what happened at her school? It’s a damning portrayal of the school. Real people work there. Her op Ed wasn’t published anonymously… like another one in recent memory in COTH that apparently almost involved lawyers. Nope - this letter was published with the writers first and last name attached to it. A writer who is a MINOR.
It’s fair to ask if fact checking with the school was done prior to publishing this letter, and if anyone st the school was provided the opportunity to make a statement regarding a 15 year old student being “forced” to drop a class there because of uncontrolled graphic bullying going on in the classroom environment.
@Virginia Horse Mom Thank you for the response! I guess my main point is that certain high schools have unique specialized programs. One of my friends from college went to a high school that used a STEM-focused curriculum. Last night, I asked about his high school course load and he took Intro. to Engineering as a sophomore (he went to a very rigorous school in Virginia).
I personally interpreted her being “forced” to drop out of the class as she either had to endure the bullying or leave. The nature of my profession may make me pessimistic, but I didn’t find the lack of action by the guidance counselor particularly odd. Considering that this was an example of “in-person” bullying and not online, there may not have been any physical evidence of the harassment. Furthermore, depending on who was present during the bullying, their may not have been any witnesses willing to step forward. I have plenty of clients who have had similar experiences at their school (usually in regards to retaliation for reporting a popular classmate, teacher, or coach for sexual abuse).
I had a few W’s on my high school transcript. My college counselor just added a short blurb to explain why I had to withdraw (in my case, I got super sick and had to miss a few weeks of school one semester. A few of my classes had incredibly strict attendance policies and I had to drop them, even though I had kept up with all of the homework assignments and been listening to audio recordings of the classes from the hospital). I told my parents myself - they were never informed by the school. They got very upset with some of my teachers for upholding the policy in my circumstance, but I understood where they were coming from and I ended up just taking a few extra credits the following semester to stay on track. I don’t think it impacted my college admissions process in any way. Granted, I ended up taking the college equivalent of the classes I withdrew from at my state university - so this was probably very different than most scenarios.
Also, while my parents were generally over-protective, they allowed me to control my academic schedule by the time I was around 15. They would only look at my report card if I initiated the conversation (i.e. I would ask them to see my online transcript) and I’m 99% sure that they wouldn’t even know that I withdrew from a class unless I told them.
Your comment about Title IX actually reminds me of my experience in high school. Having a bunch of teenagers taking classes at a university definitely had its share of pros and cons. Most of the students in that program had very protective parents and/or lived relatively sheltered lives. While I never felt bullied by other students at my high school, I did feel very isolated from those outside of the program (it included students from a couple of local high schools as well). A lot of my classmates also expressed this feeling of isolation. Having mentors in higher education was wonderful & I believe that the experience was instrumental in my friends and I’s personal growth. At the same time, there were quite a few instances in which adults (including undergrads & grad TA’s) would cross the line with the students. I remember one instance in which a grad TA had invited our recitation to a day party at his house. I declined the invitation since I had to go to the dentist right after, but I was sent pictures from the party by a few of my friends. One of my classmates was sitting on his lap in most of them - she was 14 at the time. I believe he was in his mid or late 20’s. There was also a bunch of alcohol being served. Title IX didn’t get involved until the police got involved, but that’s a story for another day. My apologies for getting off topic - I’ve been thinking about those experiences for quite a few days so I got a bit carried away.
TL:DR I agree that any story that is being nationally published should be fact-checked. However, I don’t really see the facts of her specific situation to be particularly strange. In many places, bullying is not taken seriously and the school doesn’t get too involved unless it involves threats of violence or physical contact.
I will say that if the story presented regarding the school is as presented
ie 15 year old girl graphically sexually bullied that is known about by administrators is compelled to withdraw from a class
I agree that that leads to a lawsuit and firings and/or aggressive disciplinary actions of the teachers and administrators involved, let alone the male students.
VaHM that was a much clearer demonstration of your point, thanks, and it also brings us right back around to:
I mean, I guess I knew that? But I feel like we have seen them dig in deeper on occasion (though perhaps it has been awhile…) and I find this radio silence a bit odd given the voracious discussion that has been one of the main traffic drivers to their site for the past month. Clearly there is interest in the story. Clearly there is an audience for something beyond the puff-pieces and vanity ads. If they had done some real reporting on this and locked it behind a paywall I would have probably finally re-upped my old subscription.
And if not COTH, who? The Plaid Horse? Noelle Floyd?! Those do a great job of entertaining and should stick to their lanes because not one person there is a journalist. But COTH poses itself as the “Wall Street Journal” of Horsedom (or used to? Pre-MB?) and has some pretty slick writers and at least one that I know for a fact has no problem getting into the thick of things. I would LOVE (and pay!) to see them fulfill a more WSJ-esque role in this industry, and their “He said with a laugh” writers would probably thrive with some real reporting opportunities.
