Teacher Bytes

According to an article by Jacqui Chengon ARS Technica, the United States Court of Appeals upheld a lower court’s ruling that a school was within its right to remove a student from the student council because she called an administrator a “douchebag” on her blog. What struck me was a school’s punishment of what a student posted on her personal blog with her personal computer was upheld in court after the student sued on First Amendment grounds.

While the court acknowledged adults’ rights to use vulgar or offensive speech on the Internet to make a point it said schools are different. The court said in its opinion that schools, “may legitimately give rise to disciplinary action by a school” if the school “was responsible for teaching students the boundaries of socially appropriate behavior.” Even though the blog post did not use any school resources, it was related to a school activity and did cause some disruption of the educational environment. The final point the appeals court made was that it claimed that being on student council was a “privilege” which the school could rescind at anytime, especially if the student’s actions undermined the values of the extracurricular activity.

Federal courts have given schools extraordinary powers to go outside of the Constitution provided schools could show where an action could undermine the safety and security of the school. However, the court has also backed up student free speech in certain circumstances. In Tinker v. Des Moines Independent School District the United States Supreme Court said schools could not restrict the right student speech as long as it did not disrupt school. It is possible that if the student in question had been suspended the court might have sided with the student. However, the court of appeals ruling does open a door for schools to regulate what students say on the Internet that has been previously closed. This case should closely watched, especially if it goes to the United States Supreme Court.

One other thing that should be mentioned about this case. To the young lady’s credit, she called for fellow students to e-mail, write, or call the school district’s superintendent to show support for a concert the school kept postponing for one reason or another. Never in the language of the blog post did the student advocate anything else. This shows the students of the school in question has learned their lessons in civics. However, it is unfortunate the student decided to use vulgar language in her call for action.

Should students be punished for what they write, podcast, or vodcast over the Internet using their own comptuers and access if vulgar language is used to critize school officials? Let me know.

I don’t want to start an argument about First Amendment rights protecting freedom of the press but there is a paradox brewing. Interesting how one set of rules and values works for one group but is strictly taboo for another. Take my Web Media Class for example. I could only imagine what would happen to me if my students where to publish their full names, class schedules, and where they live on their blogs, podcasts, and (soon) wikis. Parents would riot outside the school, burning me in effigy, a group breaks into the school (or the principal lets them in) who takes me out to the nearest tree. There I will be hung, burned at the stake, drawn and quartered, stoned, and beheaded. At the end of all this, the principal comes up to me and says “You’re fired!” in a more condescending manner than Donald Trump could ever muster.

Let’s take these same students and sign them up in a you-name-the-sport recreation league, school or club team. All of the students do great (at least in their parents’ opinion, coaches’ opinions don’t count) in their sport. The same group of parents who would be facing lynching charges after what they did to me will descend on the offices of our local newspapers threating sports editors and reporters with the same fate that befell me if, get this, newspapers does not write stories with pictures of how their budding stars got that game winning hit, scored a hat-trick, and set a world record all in the same game (according to parents, again coaches don’t count). Heaven forbid there should be a a college athletic scholarship or professional prospects in the future and the exploits are not recounted in minute details. How will the college coaches and pro scouts find their 8 year-old prodigy? Let some academic achievement or arts event go by without press coverage and the outcry is almost as loud. Recently, both local papers wrote stories about my Web Media class which printed the full name of a few of my students.

The paradox is most newspapers post online copies of their articles everyday. Newspapers, like all businesses being affected by technology, must move to the online world to stay competitive. However, I pick up a paper one day and in one section there is some student poetry published with students names, ages and pictures. In another section the paper is printing “trading cards” of players in a local baseball league with names, picture, team name, position, favorite team, and favorite player. Again, all of this information, a potential treasure trove for predators, can be found online. I asked a sports reporter about this last year and he admitted that he never thought about it that way but said he would report report what he thought was news worthy. Personally, I have few problems about how our local media reports the news. I have worked with reporters on the local, state, national, and even international levels in my role as teacher, soccer coach, and technology intergrationist. There are a few reporters and editors I consider friends. Yet, at the risk of sounding anti-press, it sometimes irks me about how the media shrills about how online predators can find all kinds of information about children online in an effort to sell newspapers or get ratings but don’t realize they help contribute to the problem they warn people about. Again, it makes for an interesting paradox.

Note: Normally I would insert links to annotate my points but since that would mean posting information about children online you will have to trust me on this one. Thanks.

Update: Here is a link to an example of a news story designed to scare people about online dangers. Thanks to CNET’s Buzz Out Loud for the link.