A few days ago I read a story about a mother (who works as a teacher) who was suing the state of Missouri because a law forbidding teachers from contacting students on non-educational websites such as Facebook, Twitter etc. was preventing her from being able to speak to her own daughter on Facebook. Now it seems reasonable enough that a mother should be able to contact her daughter, so having an exemption for family members seems like the obvious answer. However, the suit brought out a lot of anger from teachers and students alike who feel that they should be allowed to talk to whomever they want, after all they have the right to free speech, right?
Now, I don't really see the reasoning here. I love the Internet, I spend hours using it. I have at least one account on various social networks but I never had any desire to "follow"or "friend" any of my teachers. Some teachers and students argue that Facebook is a convenient way to contact the teacher if the student is having homework problems etc. But these days most schools provide students and teachers with school board sanctioned e-mail addresses for situations like these. Besides, what ever happened to teachers answering questions in class? I really do not understand the constant NEED for teachers and students to be in touch. I really don't think there is one. And I definitely don't see to be an issue of free speech. I don't see how in any way a teacher is slighted by not being able to contact a student at his or her whim.
The main reason for the law is to keep sexual predators away. Personally I think that there more reasons for to discourage student-teacher contact outside of school. For one there is no reason for it, school is school and home is home. Constant contact even if only school related would allow teachers to expect their students to regularly check their social network accounts in anticipation of an assignment. Sure, some teachers wouldn't bother to do any work outside of the hours they are being paid for but there definitely are ones who think that children should be learning at all times and because they are teachers they are to be listened to. It also leaves out the students who aren't members of the social networks. Moreover, it can imply favoritism. When a teacher comments on photographs of one student but not the other it's an action that is very noticeable to young people. Sure, that kind of thing can happen in class as well but why take it outside of class and make the kids feel bad about themselves at home too? Not being able to comment on a child's vacation photo does not in any way take away the teachers' right for free speech.
If anything having all of that contact with children outside of classroom actually limits the teachers' free speech if you ask me. Recently a teacher was suspended because of her blog in which she complained about her students being lazy and worthless. Of course parents of the children were outraged while other teachers supported her right to free speech. Now, she never intended her students to read the blog but it was public and anyone with a knowledge of working a search engine could have access to it, which is basically what happened. A case which is more relevant to this is that of a teacher who used his Facebook account as a forum to express his disdain at the state of New York for legalizing gay marriage. The school board is investigating weather or not the issue violated its' ethics rules and until they make a final decision he has been placed in an administrative position where he has no contact with the students. So I wonder why all those teachers who are so adamant about being able to communicate with students on social networks want to put themselves in that position. Why would you want to have to watch everything you say or your friends say for a fear that you may lose your job? What if your friend posts a picture of your weekend partying and tags you in it and it's there for your students and their parents to see? Surely there will be a mother or a father who will have an issue with you and take it up with the school board. So why risk it?
I am not a fan of legislating every single thing in the world but I understand why it happens. The second a teacher sends an inappropriate message to a student the parents, provided that they're made aware of it, would sue the school board and of course they don't want that. So this law is a way of protecting themselves. To me it just seems that it would be common sense for teachers and students (and their parents) to not fraternize outside of school. And I really cannot see how this kind of communication ban is taking away any sort of rights from the teachers.
By the way, the law refers to minors so it does not apply to college/university/trade school students, at least not the ones over 18, I am not really sure how it works with the few who have yet to turn 18 when they graduate high school.
No comments:
Post a Comment