Jump to content

Talk:Mount Bachelor Academy

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Miscellaneous section

[edit]

The miscellaneous section is a rehash of the news piece about Forest Grove School District v. T.A. The author is expressing an opinion about battles between parents and local school districts. The second sentence is not sourced; the citation given does not support the statement, it is essentially an external link. Cdw1952 (talk) 02:23, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think that he is trying to write that in this link like almost everyone else that has something to do with referrals that involve Educational consultants, it is stated how such persons are paid by programs to refer kids to the program regardless if they are a fit to the program or not.

On January 29, 2000 I had a telephone conference with Ms. Nancy Hungerford and Mr. Taylor. Because of the issues that had arisen concerning Dr. Conway’s impartiality I offered the parties an opportunity to arrange for another evaluation of J. J. by an independent examiner. Both parties declined.


I dont know how we can write that there is an entire industry which is working as recruitment office for the therapeutic boarding schools. JohanGraham (talk) 07:06, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The income of Educational consultants are half and half from both parents and the schools, so the court is right in doubting whether there is a conflict of interests. Some Educational consultants refer to only a few schools all the time. I believe that it is impossible to remove this conflict of interest unless laws are made that demands educational Consultants to publish where their income come from. The Dr. Conway mentioned in the link is nothing out of the ordinary OscarPetterson (talk) 05:04, 20 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This article is about Mount Bachelor Academy, not about educational consultants and not a place to critique Therapeutic Boarding Schools and their referral systems. I suggest that this article is not the place for the miscellaneous section. Since it is poorly written and poorly sourced I suggest it be removed. Cdw1952 (talk) 04:21, 29 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There are only two ways students can end up at Mount Bachelor Academy. 1) They can get referred from one of the wilderness programs which is owned by the company which run Mount Bachelor Academy. 2) They can get referred by a educational consultant paid by Mount Bachelor Academy for this referral. It is not like there is a waiting list by students who want to transfer to this school. I believe that the application process should be a part of the article about this facility. It might not be that the Miscellaneous section is not the right place for it, but when courts documents so clearly state that educational consulants are the marketing section for this school and even the supreme court has been involved in cases regarding this specific facility it would be an error not to include the application process. JohanGraham (talk) 12:41, 29 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
WIth all due respect that is not so, there are other ways to get into a school like this. Parents might enroll their students and courts might direct students to the school or as with the boy who died at SageWalk the student might | volunteer to enroll.
With respect to the first sentence in the section "As many other private schools they are often mentioned in battles between parents and school district when the two parties can not agree on whether the school district has a better option than the private solution.", the cited source is about the supreme court deciding who is financially responsible for JJ's education under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. The article cited does not "mention [MBA or any other school] in battles...". The cited article does not support the claim.
As to the second sentence, "On the internet one of these case tells the story about persons seems to have several interests to serve in these cases." the cited source does not support the claim. Whoever wrote this is drawing conclusions not stated in the document linked. Furthermore the quote above starting with "On January 29, 2000..." is taken completely out of context. Dr. Conway was not the one who referred JJ to MBA, Dr. Moran was the first to suggest it. The fact that both parties declined another evaluation is confirmation that both sides agreed that Dr. Conway's evaluations would stand. I read the linked paper and I could go on about what it says but the bottom line is this, it's about the facts surrounding JJ's history, not a controversy about conflict of interest.
I can understand your desire to expose the collusion between MBA and educational consultants, but this section and the cited sources don't support the claim. Cdw1952 (talk) 00:37, 30 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The boy who was allowed to cook to death due to a poor medical examination which failed to react on his positve drug test did not enroll Sagewalk voluntary. His parents used a youth transport firm with all what that includes (shackles, handcuffs, stun baton, pepper spray). A quote from a newspaperarticle: Investigator calls wilderness school reckless in teen’s death:

On Aug. 27, between 5:30 a.m. and 6:30 a.m., two “transporters” contracted by SageWalk woke Blashchishen at his home in Portland to take him to SageWalk, according to the affidavit. Blashchishen’s parents, who had been told to be away when their son was picked up, watched from a neighbor’s house.
Poré wrote in the affidavit that surprise early-morning pickups are a frequent occurrence for new SageWalk students.
Blashchishen arrived in Redmond around 9 a.m. and was later transported to a medical facility for blood tests and a drug screening, according to the affidavit. He tested positive for THC, a substance found in marijuana, but a staff member present for the testing said no additional questions were asked about Blashchishen’s drug use or his two-year cigarette smoking habit, which his mother had listed on a school medical history form.

It was in no way voluntary, but the parents felt bad and gave the press another story in the start. I cannot blame them, but the journalists should have investigated.
Regarding the court transcript. I have googled both consultants. In a lot of cases involving Mount Bachelor Academy you will see their name as much as if they would have worked for the school themselves. They are close to be have a status as employees OscarPetterson (talk) 05:53, 30 October 2009 (UTC).[reply]
I share in the outrage over the treatment of this young boy. Your linked article refutes the parent's claim that Sergey's participation was voluntary. However, we are becoming distracted from the issue at hand. I tried to repeat your Google search and got three articles that involved Dr. Conway none of which were concerning the issues raised in the miscellaneous section. Dr. Moran appeared in one of those three. All three documents are decisions over a free, appropriate public education (FAPE) and the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. Dr. Conway's testimony in all three cases is part of the findings of fact. In the JJ case Ms. Hungerford tried to claim that Dr. Conway did not disclose his regular consulting for MBA and that this should have a bearing on the outcome of the case. The judge offered to have someone else evaluate JJ and both parties declined. This dispute does not support a claim of "several interests to serve". It is inappropriate for a wiki author to pick out pieces from several sources and to come to a conclusion. Reading three cases and noticing that Dr. Conway is mentioned in them does not support the claims made.
So I ask, How might the miscellaneous section be written to report something that is supported by a cited reference? This is what we are compelled to do by Wiki standards, no opinion, no original research, etc. Cdw1952 (talk) 23:20, 30 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Open Discussion Items

[edit]

Therapeutic Boarding Schools / Emotional Growth Education - Are there connections to the Human Potential Movement? Please provide resources. Cdw1952 (talk) 22:41, 24 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This article is close to marketing now

[edit]
  • First Statements from Strugglingteens should be considered very carefully. It is a marketing firm - not a newsapaper. So when they state that the Oregon DHS sent "confusing" letters to the parents it is POV.
  • Second there are the studies of long-term outcome. If you read them closely a lot of them is founded by the firm owning Mount Bachelor Academy. I don't think that this article can use these studies without a warning that the results could be influenced by those who pay for them.
    Covergaard (talk) 18:33, 5 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Your suggestion that Strugglingteens is not a newspaper is well taken, however, the author of the piece is not making the claim that the DHS letter was confusing, they are quoting DHS and they are paraphrasing when they say DHS will inform parents "there is no imminent threat of closing MBA".
As to your second comment, what do "studies of long-term outcome" have to do with this article? Please insert a neutrality disputed tag after the passage taken from these studies so it might be properly addressed.
Lastly, I agree that the lead section sounded a little too much like advertising, I removed content that didn't describe the school. What else might you suggest we do to reduce the appearance of marketing?
Cdw1952 (talk) 05:04, 10 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]


Questionable EL

[edit]

I propose removing the external link to the "Therapeutic Schools News: A Documentary and Two Sites New to Me" article. It is apparently written by a woman (Joyce Meyers) who is at war with her ex-husband. Since there is no way to be objective about the claims in the article it is inappropriate for the page.Cdw1952 (talk) 22:36, 23 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If there's such a weird POV, I agree, remove it. tedder (talk) 22:50, 23 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the support. I was hoping to engage the original author on this one. However the link is to an opinion piece and therefore should be removed. Cdw1952 (talk) 22:41, 24 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I think that all kind of reviews should be avoided. If the program they provide is successfully implemented on the youth at the school, they are not able to differ right from wrong. To be able to get the right picture of what is going on in there a statement one or two days after enrollment would properly result in a more NPOV result.
All we are able to know about this school right now is that this Brandon H. guy is dead and there is an investigation going on about a lot of other incidents. JohanGraham (talk) 11:34, 25 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]


Edit rationale

[edit]

Content removed that violated the policy regarding neutral point of view. Content removed or edited that was not supported by the cited articles. Content removed that was from a discussion thread in a cited article and therefore not a reliable source. Cdw1952 (talk) 06:07, 11 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your work on this. Did you find a cite for "Brandon H."? I suspect maybe so, as you found more information to add.. tedder (talk) 06:15, 11 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

User: 87.48.134.50 added citation in history section to program history page [1]. Source page does not support text of the history section. Specifically the cited source does not mention 1) Aspen Education Group 2) Large Group Awareness Training 3) Lifespring 4) Programming of teenagers. All of history section appears to be conjecture or original research. Either way it needs to be updated to conform to Wiki policies or deleted. Cdw1952 (talk) 22:47, 14 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Added source citation for December '98 death of Brandon H. Crook County Sheriff Office case number: 982737, Case Detective: Sergeant Avey.Cdw1952 (talk) 02:48, 18 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

History section

[edit]

I believe that this link can reinstate the deleted history section. It clearly decribes the origins of the program.

lawsuits and potential NPOV

[edit]

I think not expanding on the allegations of sexual abuse is the way to go. To much would cause possible wp:undue IMO. However, if the others here feel more clarification on the sex abuse allegation is warranted, two time articles mention it:
http://healthland.time.com/2011/04/05/increasingly-internet-activism-helps-shutter-abusive-troubled-teen-boot-camps/#ixzz1KZAOBn41 http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1891082,00.html
The allegation seems to be that female students that had a history of sexual abuse were made to dress in a sexually provocative manner and required to dance in a sexually suggestive manner in front of male students. to put it in the most neutral terms. The cited sources state that the claim is that the female students actually had to give male students "lap dances" - the reason i don't want to elaborate too much about this in the article, is that even tho this was reported in a wp:rs, the specific allegation is just so bizarre I think including the specifics would be wp:undue Snertking (talk) 03:19, 20 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I see your point but to me since there are indeed multiple reputable articles describing such abuse and its unsettling nature/ connection to the school's policy as a whole suggests to me that it does indeed merit expansion.Masonpew (talk) 05:45, 25 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Possible inclusion of GAO report regarding this type of school

[edit]

I was wondering if we could find a way to work in this enormously informative Government Accountability Office report which attempts to verify accounts of abuse at residential treatment schools like this one (Mount Bachelor Academy has faced a litany of abuse and neglect charges, as mentioned here) http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d08146t.pdf Masonpew (talk) 05:48, 25 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Mount Bachelor Academy. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:56, 6 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Mount_Bachelor_Academy&oldid=1209210913"