Students with Myspace accounts will be suspended...WTF??

[WhyNot]

[QUOTE=Lissa]
They did at my school.
[/QUOTE]

You didn’t go to a Catholic school, according to your previous posts. You went to a whackjob Fundamentalist Christian abuse factory. Why are you holding them up now as the standard of what private education should be?

[tomndebb]

[QUOTE=WhyNot]
You didn’t go to a Catholic school, according to your previous posts. You went to a whackjob Fundamentalist Christian abuse factory. Why are you holding them up now as the standard of what private education should be?
[/QUOTE]
What part of her statement appeared to you to be proposing that as a good standard–as opposed to simply confirming an activity upon which another poster had cast doubt?

[Sarahfeena]

[QUOTE=tomndebb]
While I agree the rule is silly, I have a harder time getting worked up over prohibiting MySpace accounts to kids in grade school than those in high school.
[/QUOTE]
I agree with you, there.

[catsix]

They did at my school. Their stance was that we students represented the school 24/7 and any of our behavior on-or-off campus reflected upon the school. I know of a boy who was expelled because one of the teachers saw him in a grocery store wearing a Metallica t-shirt. (Rock music or even music which sounded like rock was forbidden.) A girl was expelled because it was rumored that she had been pregnant and gotten an abortion. Parents were constantly calling the principal to tattle on other kids: “Little Suzy was over playing with my daughter Jane and while they were playing, I heard Suzy say a bad word!”

At my husband’s school, the nuns weren’t just looking for sins so they could punish. They were genuinely concerned about the kids. I see a world of difference in that.

Those examples illustrate the problem with such oppressive and over-reaching behavior by school employees better than I could myself. It’s actually frightening to think that kind of behavior is being defended by anyone here, where if the majority of parents want their kids in an environment of constantly being spied on, it’s somehow acceptable. What’s worse is that the adults in the situation should know better than to think that tattling on their children’s friends to the school principal is in any way mature behavior. Are these people just completely unable to grow up, or what?

As for the ‘genuine concern’ angle, well, being concerned doesn’t give anyone the right to be a stalker, nun or otherwise.

Sarahfeena said:
The K-8 school seems like it was pretty on-par (in terms of rules) as the local public schools, but his HS was strict, both in terms of academic performance and behavior. He says that the parents liked it that way, and that was the reason that they paid to send their kids there.

I know kids who were sent to schools like that and found it an honor to be thrown out as fast as possible. I even got myself kicked out of organizations my parents decided I should be in because I could not tolerate the over-reaching rules and interference and spying into my life.

[WhyNot]

[QUOTE=tomndebb]
What part of her statement appeared to you to be proposing that as a good standard–as opposed to simply confirming an activity upon which another poster had cast doubt?
[/QUOTE]

I agree and withdraw the question. A casual read suggested defense, when a closer read suggests only information. Mea culpa.

[D_Odds]

[QUOTE=catsix]
Those examples illustrate the problem with such oppressive and over-reaching behavior by school employees better than I could myself. It’s actually frightening to think that kind of behavior is being defended by anyone here, where if the majority of parents want their kids in an environment of constantly being spied on, it’s somehow acceptable. What’s worse is that the adults in the situation should know better than to think that tattling on their children’s friends to the school principal is in any way mature behavior. Are these people just completely unable to grow up, or what?
[/QUOTE]
I grew up in an environment of constantly being spied on, in the neighborhood of St. Albans, Queens, NY. We called them ‘neighbors’.

Later, we moved out to Long Island. While we still had people living on either side of us, they weren’t the ‘neighbors’ we were used to.

Now that I’m back in Queens, I find the ‘neighbors’ are more the isolated Long Island-style. As a parent, I understand my own parent’s comfort knowing that at least half of our block was looking after the best interests of all the children on the block.

[saoirse]

[QUOTE=PunditLisa]
It would have been far easier for my daughter’s school to mandate a “No MySpace account” rule, but they actually went to the trouble of speaking to the parents individually. The accounts were closed and the problem was solved. (And the girls will undoubtedly end up knocked up in a few years and the parents will, once again, be surprised that their little princess. who posed like a porn star at the tender age of 12, actually had sex with a boy.)
[/QUOTE]

Jesus Christ, do we always have to play “Punish The Sluts?”

[Miller]

[QUOTE=saoirse]
Jesus Christ, do we always have to play “Punish The Sluts?”
[/QUOTE]

Yeah! What about “Stern Librarian and Noisy Student,” or “Prison Warden and Disobedient Prisoner?” Let’s get a little variety in here!

[FisherQueen]

I haven’t seen it mentioned yet, so I will:

MySpace accounts cause an enormous amount of difficulty at school. Fistfights break out at school because X was talking smack about Y on MySpace, or Z’s ex-boyfriend put up her naked pictures, or some such. Even though they happen at home, they frequently have effects that make it difficult to keep discipline at school. Some schools have a LOT of trouble with kids coming in to school to get revenge for what somebody said about them or did to them on MySpace, and this school might be one of them.

Mind you, I don’t think that this policy is the best way to handle the problem.

[PunditLisa]

[QUOTE=saoirse]
Jesus Christ, do we always have to play “Punish The Sluts?”
[/QUOTE]

Actually, it was more of a “Ridicule the clueless parents who have blinders on when it comes to their own children” kind of criticism, but however you’d like to interpret it…

[Lissa]

[QUOTE=catsix]
Those examples illustrate the problem with such oppressive and over-reaching behavior by school employees better than I could myself. It’s actually frightening to think that kind of behavior is being defended by anyone here, where if the majority of parents want their kids in an environment of constantly being spied on, it’s somehow acceptable. What’s worse is that the adults in the situation should know better than to think that tattling on their children’s friends to the school principal is in any way mature behavior. Are these people just completely unable to grow up, or what?

As for the ‘genuine concern’ angle, well, being concerned doesn’t give anyone the right to be a stalker, nun or otherwise.

[/QUOTE]

Well, it really comes down to the following questions:

1. Does a parent have the right to consistently monitor their child’s activities to prevent behaviors they feel are negative, and
2. Does a parent have a right to hire someone else to do this as well?

If so, the nuns are hardly stalkers, only people acting in loco parentis as requested by the parents themselves.

That is my entire point. I only really posted because of the statement that the principal should have stood up to the parents. That is like asking a Secret Service agent to allow someone to shoot the President. It is counter to their entire purpose for being hired in the 1st place. Now, one can argue that Secret Service agents are stupid, or that they serve no purpose, or how they do their jobs is wrong; but to criticize them for doing the job they were hired to complete is misguided. Same goes for private school principals, teachers etc…

Now, as for whether or not I agree with raisng children like this, that is a whole different ball game. From personal experience only, I saw what repression did to some kids, it was bad. On the other hand, I also have heard reports of how positive it is going to school around teachers who generally care for the kids, both during school hours and after.

Also, please note, this does not mean only private school teachers care- I would say it has more to do with the leaders/teachers of any individual school than it has to do with private/non-private. However, the only major difference is that the private schools can get rid of kids/parents that do not follow their rules, whereas the public schools are stuck with them unless they committ egregious offenses.

[CairoCarol]

“If you don’t like it, don’t send your kids there” presupposes that there’s anywhere better, or even as good, to send them.

A very important point. And even if there is another school, it is hardly beneficial to a child to be ripped out of their educational/social environment and placed in a new school, however justifiable the parents’ outrage at a new policy which was not part of the picture when they selected the school.

I’m not saying this means “private schools can’t set rules, because some of the parents might not like them, and those parents would have no reasonable recourse.” Of course the school can set rules. But for the reasons so cogently expressed by Intravenus De Milo, this particular one is bad, so I hope the parents don’t allow it to stand.

Also, while it is almost entirely up to the school administration and parents to establish rules at a private institution, the outside world most certainly has the right to comment, and not only for free speech reasons: a private school is still part of the broader society. We’re going to have to live with these kids when they grow up, so yeah, we do have an interest in seeing that they are sensibly educated.

[Sarahfeena]

[QUOTE=catsix]
I know kids who were sent to schools like that and found it an honor to be thrown out as fast as possible. I even got myself kicked out of organizations my parents decided I should be in because I could not tolerate the over-reaching rules and interference and spying into my life.
[/QUOTE]
I think we are arguing two different things here:

1. Whether or not the school/parents have the RIGHT to set such a rule, and

2. Whether or not it’s a SMART THING for the school/parents to set such a rule.

I am arguing #1 above, not #2. This is not a public school, and the parents and administration should be working together to set a policy that is desired by all, presumably with the intention of creating a positive learning environment.

#2 is a different issue. I don’t necessarily have an opinion on whether the rule is a smart one or not. To a large extent, I think it depends on the school, the parents, and the kids involved.

Regarding my husband’s high school, I find that most of the kids who go there (I live about 5 blocks from it) generally desired to go there. It is stricter than the local public HS, but it’s also very well-regarded in terms of academics, so it’s not really thought of as “punishment” to be sent there.