New Rules regarding children etc... - cougarguard.com — unofficial BYU Cougars / LDS sports, football, basketball forum and message board

SteelBlue · 03-23-2006, 09:05 PM

Just received some new policies regarding those who work with children. There are many good changes, but they will require some creativity in smaller wards. Don't have the letter in front of me right now, but going from memory a few of the new rules (there were old policy reminders as well):

1) Any male called to teach a primary class needs to have a second male in the room with him. No more male primary teachers teaching solo. A married couple is still ok obviously.

2) Doors of classrooms with primary children should have windows in them.

3) Anytime a member of the bishopric is extending a calling or in an interview with a child or a woman, somebody should be appointed to be outside the door.

There are several others, but #1 will have an immediate effect on smaller wards. It almost precludes calling male teachers into the primary.

Brian · 03-24-2006, 02:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SteelBlue

2) Doors of classrooms with primary children should have windows in them.

A wise move. I once taught a class of 9 year old boys and their gasseous moments were legion. I think they should require fans too.

Regards,
Brian

ute4ever · 03-24-2006, 03:57 AM

No more single men teaching primary?

Millions of men worldwide just let out a collective halleleujia.

myboynoah · 03-24-2006, 07:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ute4ever

No more single men teaching primary?

Millions of men worldwide just let out a collective halleleujia.

I don't know; I liked being a primary teacher. Wrapped everything up on Sunday. With fewer other meetings, it allowed me to have more "my" time.

I wonder if this will apply outside the U.S. If so, Mrs. myboynoah isn't going to be happy. We're a small ward (average attendance at sac meeting is 65) and she has a very good male teacher for the 11 year olds. This is going to be overkill in some wards (two teachers for 2-3 kids?!?!?).

FarrahWaters · 03-24-2006, 11:07 AM

This is not good news for our primary. We too have a great male teacher for our mostly male eleven-year old class. He's a great steadying influence on them. We've already had to combine a few classes because of lack of available people for teachers. Our male teachers are married, but their wives have other callings and can't be in the room with them. Don't know what we're going to do.

myboynoah · 03-24-2006, 11:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FarrahWaters

We too have a great male teacher for our mostly male eleven-year old class. He's a great steadying influence on them.

Exactly! Just last week my wife was noting the need boys that age seem to have for a male influence, especially to keep them in line and singing "you've had a birthday, shout hooray!"

I taught that class for three years running in our old ward. It was a blast.

Very few AG theory discussions, though.

SteelBlue · 03-24-2006, 02:13 PM

I reviewed the letter, and there is an out for smaller wards and branches. It says that in smaller wards a member of the primary presidency may visit the class (taught by one man) frequently. It gives no definition of frequently though.

SoCalCoug · 03-25-2006, 03:19 AM

I guess my ward hasn't gotten the memo. I teach 5-year-olds by myself.

SteelBlue · 03-25-2006, 03:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SoCalCoug

I guess my ward hasn't gotten the memo. I teach 5-year-olds by myself.

We just got it 3 days ago. So our primary doesn't even know yet.

03-25-2006, 03:19 AM	#8
SoCalCoug Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: Orange County, California Posts: 3,059	I guess my ward hasn't gotten the memo. I teach 5-year-olds by myself. __________________ Get your stinking paws off me, you damned, dirty Yewt! "Now perhaps as I spanked myself screaming out "Kozlowski, say it like you mean it bitch!" might have been out of line, but such was the mood." - Goatnapper "If you want to fatten a pig up to make the pig MORE delicious, you can feed it almost anything. Seriously. The pig is like the car on Back to the Future. You put in garbage, and out comes something magical!" - Cali Coug

03-23-2006, 09:05 PM	#1
SteelBlue Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: Norcal Posts: 5,821	New Rules regarding children etc... Just received some new policies regarding those who work with children. There are many good changes, but they will require some creativity in smaller wards. Don't have the letter in front of me right now, but going from memory a few of the new rules (there were old policy reminders as well): 1) Any male called to teach a primary class needs to have a second male in the room with him. No more male primary teachers teaching solo. A married couple is still ok obviously. 2) Doors of classrooms with primary children should have windows in them. 3) Anytime a member of the bishopric is extending a calling or in an interview with a child or a woman, somebody should be appointed to be outside the door. There are several others, but #1 will have an immediate effect on smaller wards. It almost precludes calling male teachers into the primary.

03-24-2006, 03:57 AM	#3
ute4ever I must not tell lies Join Date: Aug 2005 Posts: 5,103	No more single men teaching primary? Millions of men worldwide just let out a collective halleleujia.

03-24-2006, 11:07 AM	#5
FarrahWaters Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2006 Posts: 1,122	This is not good news for our primary. We too have a great male teacher for our mostly male eleven-year old class. He's a great steadying influence on them. We've already had to combine a few classes because of lack of available people for teachers. Our male teachers are married, but their wives have other callings and can't be in the room with them. Don't know what we're going to do.

03-24-2006, 02:13 PM	#7
SteelBlue Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: Norcal Posts: 5,821	I reviewed the letter, and there is an out for smaller wards and branches. It says that in smaller wards a member of the primary presidency may visit the class (taught by one man) frequently. It gives no definition of frequently though.