OK, school reports to me that my offspring’s public FB page or Twitter calls a teacher a goatfelcher, I’m having a stern talk with said offspring about what is proper behavior towards others and what’s appropriate for public open forums and taking him/her offline for some time.
But… School demands the passwords to go on a fishing expedition into the private areas of my kid’s accounts? Ohhohohoh, then I’m linking the kid’s post in my page. Request the offending material be removed, fine; demanding the password so they can dig around on ALL her communications including the non-published ones and potentially delete or alter content or contacts or go aftter third parties is crossing the line, be it school or employer (and BTW already at least one state forbids your employer demanding the password to your private pages).
… (I suppose that means that’s how it was quoted on the written brief, so the clerk writes it down in order to make clear it was not the clerk who censored the expletive, but whoever submitted it had already done so)
I have to disagree with you here. What kind of punishment is applicable then? School suspensions and expulsions are scrutinized under the Due Process Clause, so if a student is expelled or suspended, DP MUST be afforded them.
“Off Campus” conduct, not of a potential to have an “on campus” effect, is protected activity.
I checked the decision and it indeed cites Morse, this was the “Bong hits for Jesus” case;
…As the Supreme Court explained in 2007, “student expression may not be suppressed unless school officials reasonably conclude that it will materially and substantially disrupt the work and discipline of the school.” Morse v. Frederick, 551 U.S. 393, 403 (2007) (citation omitted). Out-of-school speech by a student is subject to even less stringent school regulation than in-school speech. See id. at 405… (explaining,
I’ll modify my stance by saying that demanding the password is wrong. (But did they demand? They asked and she told, right?) But I stand by my belief that if a student posts on Facebook that her teacher is a dickhead, then that it certainly a matter that will affect school discipline and should be dealt with by the school.
Kids have restricted rights from the outset, and this kind of conduct naturally leads to hampering discipline in the school. Every other organization has the right to police this kind of conduct. If you are a member of the local Kiwanis Club, but post on Facebook that Kiwanis members are a bunch of assholes, they can call you out on that in the next meeting. I know that a school is a government agency, but they need to have internal policies to protect the integrity of their organization.
I fail to see the outrage here. This student is a member of the school. She posts inflammatory remarks about someone who acts in loco parentis to her 5 days a week. When she gets to school, she needs to answer for that somehow (even if the request for the password is too much).
That can also be distinguished. I’m not advocating wiretapping by school authorities. If Jani tells Joni at the mall or on the phone that Mr. Smith is a dickhead, then that is fine. That has happened since the concept of school began. But a Facebook post is a quasi-public communication that can affect how Jani, Joni, and all other students view Mr. Smith and his role as an authority figure in the school.
In the PDF of the court decision (linked in the 4th post), it states on pages 6-7:
After that, it states that they spent at least 15 minutes looking through her accounts and private messages, commenting on things like her use of profanity and her taking “sex quizzes” on Facebook. They’ve got a counselor, a cop, and some unknown-to-her person practically cross-examining a 12-year-old girl about her private stuff after threatening her into turning over her passwords.
Yeah and I understand the school requiring the offending post be removed on pain of suspension etc. They do not, however, get to trawl through email accounts etc owned by the kid. What’s next searching her room for her diary? Sending home a laptop which will film her in her room… oh wait
I think it’s reasonable to argue that widely distributed (off campus) complaints about teachers can disrupt the school environment, so they are fair game for in school punishment. From the article
I would presume that a generic “I hate my teacher” remark, even on Facebook, would not rise to this level, but being off school grounds isn’t quite like a trip to Vegas. What happens there, may come back to bite you in the ass, so don’t be an idiot.
Then why stop at FB postings?! For that matter, why haven’t the schools stepped in, and punished those who have mocked their teachers in face to face conversation before now? :dubious: Clue: The reason why not, is the same reason that what you propose is a bad idea.
If the teachers are actually defamed, they have a civil remedy in suing the student for defamation. If they threaten, then a restraining order is possible. I’ve done this case for a teacher.
That does trouble me that her parents weren’t there for this interrogation. However, if her parents had done the same thing, nobody would have complained. I don’t think it rises to a constitutional violation because the school is allowed to take action to protect school matters.
And, in a larger role, if a 12 year old is using profanity, bitching about her teachers, and taking sex quizzes, that is a sign of a problem for the child that needs to be corrected and reported to her parents. Her “rights” in this situation may lead her down a dark road in the future. It is up to school administrators, along with parents, to see this dangerous behavior and seek the root cause of it.
I grew up in a day when parents and teachers worked together for the best interests of the students. Today, it’s an us vs. them attitude that is unhealthy. If I was that girl’s father, I would bitch the administration out for not calling me first before interrogating my daughter. But then after reflection, I would be happy to know what they found so that my little girl could get the help she needs..
Frankly, the problem isn’t the teacher’s feelings, it’s ensuring a productive classroom environment. The people hurt by disruptions are the other students, who now have a harder time getting the education they are entitled to.
The case I did involved anonymous threats of violence. And it was really obvious which student it was. Teachers know and don’t care about students just being bad-mouthing teenagers.
While state defamation laws differ, it can be greatly assumed a teacher IS a Public Official, therefore malice must be shown to be successful.
There was a case in Ohio some years ago on whether a High School principal was a PO for defamation purposes. I would have to look to see how it was decided.
Kids don’t need to be taught respect for positions of authority. Everyone, kids and authority figures included, need to learn to earn the respect of others by acting respectfully. Respect comes from behavior, not position. This isn’t a discipline issue, it’s an educational one.
If kids are losing respect for a teacher, it’s probably not because someone posted they were a dick. It’s probably because they were in fact acting dickishly.
What the school did was at least as bad as what the student did and probably worse because they should know better, and because they have made themselves hypocrites. They should be leading by example. You cannot teach respect for others while acting disrespectfully towards them.
If there are disruptions in class, those can be dealt with directly and in class. If there’s no disruption in class, then no ones education is being threatened. In either case, it’s ludicrous to go around harassing students for their off campus statements with some vague notion that it may eventually translate into in class disruptions.
… (I suppose that means that’s how it was quoted on the written brief, so the clerk writes it down in order to make clear it was not the clerk who censored the expletive, but whoever submitted it had already done so)