Oprah School Too Strict - "More like reformatory".

S

Skeptik

Banned
Joined
Nov 5, 2005
Messages
6,591
Reaction score
0
Location
Censorville
Oprah's school 'too strict'
11/03/2007 18:39 - (SA) Gavin Prins

Johannesburg - The rules at Oprah Winfrey's ultra-posh school at Henley-on-Klip near Johannesburg are apparently so strict they make a reformatory look like a holiday resort.

That's the word from upset parents, who say the school rules make it difficult for them to keep contact with their children.

They would have aired their concerns during a satellite link-up with the chat show queen a week ago, but that was cancelled at short notice by the school's management body.

Meanwhile the school seems to have made the rules even stricter. Until now, the girls could receive visitors every fortnight, but parents can now only visit them once a month.

Frances Mans, foster mother of Gweneth Mulder, said last week she would take her daughter out of the school if the rules were not changed.

'Surely this isn't a prison?'

Cellphones and e-mail correspondence are out of bounds during the week, and girls are only allowed to phone their parents at weekends.

The maximum number of visitors per pupil is four, and visits have to be approved by the school at least two weeks in advance.

Mans said she had to wait at the security gate for half an hour to be signed in when she went to visit her daughter last Sunday.

"It was a nightmare. We had only two hours to see my child. Surely this isn't a prison or an institution?"

The names of visitors must also match those on the security guard's list before guests are allowed in.

Parents are not allowed to smuggle junk food in to the girls past the matrons.

"Then the girls lose points," says Mans.

The girls get points for "good behaviour", which they can exchange at a school shop for clothes and caps.

No treats allowed

"The poor children are not even allowed to have any treats. Their diet is fruit, yoghurt and sandwiches. When they go on holiday for a month in April they'll be stuffing themselves with sweets and chocolates in any case."

Angela Conradie, whose daughter Michelle is at the school, says she's just as upset about the strict visiting times.

"Michelle phones me in tears sometimes, and then I don't know what to say to her," says Conradie.

John Samuels, the executive head of the school, confirmed that only one visit a month would be allowed in future.

This means that if a girl has five siblings, she will only be able to see all of them over a period of three months.

Samuels says he sees nothing wrong with the system.

"We have the security and well-being of the girls at heart, in every respect. They are our priority. If there's too much movement on the premises at the weekend, it disturbs the school spirit."
Click to expand...
http://www.news24.com/News24/South_Africa/News/0,9294,2-7-1442_2081757,00.html
 
Hmmm kind of wanting your bread buttered on both sides...the girls get the free schooling without responsibility.
 
I think it can be a good thing, depending on the child. Boarding school has to have some restrictions. It can't be like a shopping mall with parents coming and going.
 
fivelza said:
Hmmm kind of wanting your bread buttered on both sides...the girls get the free schooling without responsibility.
Click to expand...
:mad:

What a foolish standard. If the girls at this school were getting sexually assaulted, would you also claim the parents are trying to get their bread buttered on both sides?

Just because they're getting something for free does not mean that they lose their rights as parents to complain if their children are being treated unfairly. In fact complaining is them excercising their responsibility as a parent.
 
Xarog said:
:mad:

What a foolish standard. If the girls at this school were getting sexually assaulted, would you also claim the parents are trying to get their bread buttered on both sides?

Just because they're getting something for free does not mean that they lose their rights as parents to complain if their children are being treated unfairly. In fact complaining is them excercising their responsibility as a parent.
Click to expand...

The definition of what is "Unfair" is different to all..... Telkoms billing is unfair to the consumer, but to the shareholders its brilliant.
I am sure the schools terms and conditions were known before the kids even started there.


There are 3 sides to every story - Your Story, My story and the Correct factual story.
 
Cellphones and e-mail correspondence are out of bounds during the week, and girls are only allowed to phone their parents at weekends.
Click to expand...
Ridiculous. What institution curtails your use of the telephone? Um, none.

[-]Gestapo Death Camp[/-] Guantanamo Bay!. :p

:mad:
 
RichardP said:
The definition of what is "Unfair" is different to all..... Telkoms billing is unfair to the consumer, but to the shareholders its brilliant.
I am sure the schools terms and conditions were known before the kids even started there.


There are 3 sides to every story - Your Story, My story and the Correct factual story.
Click to expand...
And if parents truly believe their children are not being treated fairly, they're obliged to make a fuss about it.

I guess we should really ask people who've been to boarding schools. But to my eye this stuff does seem a bit over the top. I mean ffs, they can't have sweets at all? :confused: No email? what on earth for? Especially if the school has the facilities to allow kids to stay in contact with friends and family online.
 
Xarog said:
:mad:

What a foolish standard. If the girls at this school were getting sexually assaulted, would you also claim the parents are trying to get their bread buttered on both sides?

Just because they're getting something for free does not mean that they lose their rights as parents to complain if their children are being treated unfairly. In fact complaining is them excercising their responsibility as a parent.
Click to expand...
Erm, if the girls were being sexually assaulted (which they're not), then criminal proceedings would have ensued, not so? Terrible analogy.
 
noxibox said:
Is this standard practice for boarding schools?
Click to expand...
It used to be. I'm not sure about South African schools but even in the UK we were pretty restricted on what we were and were not allowed to do - especially on school nights.
 
Could be to 'protect' the poorer kids (whose folks don't have money for snacks and phone calls.) If none has privilege less peer pressure?
 
kilo39 said:
Could be to 'protect' the poorer kids (whose folks don't have money for snacks and phone calls.) If none has privilege less peer pressure?
Click to expand...

I'm sure Oprah could spare some money for snacks and phone calls then?:rolleyes:
 
noxibox said:
Is this standard practice for boarding schools?
Click to expand...

No definately not. My kids go to boarding school and contact with parents is encouraged at every opportunity.

The school has this really weird idea that if the kids are happy, they are likely to do better at school.
 
...maybe this is some kind of 'break-down' period :) those of u who were in the army remember the first 3 months of basics, also very strict rules, with almost no priviledges.... maybe Oprah's plan is similar to get the girls, from all walks of life, races, backgrounds etc, to build some kind of comeradery, and build up from there....
If there is some suffering without the priviledges & treats, and the other freedoms, perhaps they'll learn to appreciate it more?
I suppose for evry unhappy child & parent, there are also many other parents & kids who are used to having so much less in life, so they are only too happy to have good (& free) schooling..... :)
 
Xarog said:
:mad:

What a foolish standard. If the girls at this school were getting sexually assaulted, would you also claim the parents are trying to get their bread buttered on both sides?

Just because they're getting something for free does not mean that they lose their rights as parents to complain if their children are being treated unfairly. In fact complaining is them excercising their responsibility as a parent.
Click to expand...

You assume that I have an issue with parents standing up for their children..not so.

IF, and IF they were being sexually assaulted then that would be totally different thing. I read through the article and could find no reference to this. Don't use an extreme example to support your view :rolleyes:

If the parents knew that these were the rules then why complain now, if they don't like it take their kids out of the school. I have a general discomfort here, where people want and get something for nothing, but also want it according to their terms.
 
fivelza said:
You assume that I have an issue with parents standing up for their children..not so.

IF, and IF they were being sexually assaulted then that would be totally different thing. I read through the article and could find no reference to this. Don't use an extreme example to support your view :rolleyes:

If the parents knew that these were the rules then why complain now, if they don't like it take their kids out of the school. I have a general discomfort here, where people want and get something for nothing, but also want it according to their terms.
Click to expand...

No no no! You cant possibly be that dense!?

If you bothered reading the article you will see the rules about visits has changed! You expect all the parents are Siener van Rensburgs and Nostradamuses?
 
I don't think I'm dense...but I'll let you be the judge of that...you seem to be an expert ;)

The rules have become stricter, not changed as per the above article....I read strictness as the rules being applied properly.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X