Feds, teachers to stalk your kids on Facebook now?

[Zoom-boing]

Education Department officials are threatening school principals with lawsuits if they fail to monitor and curb students’ lunchtime chat and evening Facebook time for expressing ideas and words that are deemed by Washington special-interest groups to be harassment of some students.

There has only been muted opposition to this far-reaching policy among the professionals and advocates in the education sector, most of whom are heavily reliant on funding and support from top-level education officials. The normally government-averse tech-sector is also playing along, and on Mar. 11, Facebook declared that it was “thrilled” to work with White House officials to foster government oversight of teens’ online activities.

The PJ Tatler » Feds, teachers to stalk your kids on Facebook now?


wtFF?????

wtFF???

 

[Anachronism]

You're right, this isn't something that the Government or Schools should be doing. It's something that PARENTS should be doing. However, with the lack of decent parenting in this country, who else would you suggest should be doing this?

 

[Zoom-boing]

You're right, this isn't something that the Government or Schools should be doing. It's something that PARENTS should be doing. However, with the lack of decent parenting in this country, who else would you suggest should be doing this?

No one because the parents need to step up to the plate and do their job. Just because many don't (keep in mind that many do) does not mean it's now uncle's job.

Kids having access to F/B at school is asinine and cell phones should be left at the door. As for uncle 'monitoring' them during the evening????? Oh please. What's next? What shows parents allow their kids to watch? How many times a week kids bath? This is fucking ridiculous.

 

[Anachronism]

No one because the parents need to step up to the plate and do their job. Just because many don't (keep in mind that many do) does not mean it's now uncle's job.

So what do you do with the kids who you know have parents who will not involve themselves, for whatever reason? Do you simply allow them to fall by the wayside when they fail, or do you spend more and more time, energy, and money trying to "save" them. If you're going to tell me the latter, then YES "Uncle" does need to do that job.

Kids having access to F/B at school is asinine and cell phones should be left at the door. As for uncle 'monitoring' them during the evening????? Oh please. What's next? What shows parents allow their kids to watch? How many times a week kids bath? This is fucking ridiculous.

Kids having any form of outside contact during the school day is insane. Again, if the school system is going to be required to be the parent, then YES they should have the right to restrict what the child does outside of the school. If the schools are going to allow these kids to succeed or fail on their own merits, then NO they shouldn't.

 

[FuelRod]

I'm sure the Teachers Unions are going to have a field day with this one.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

You're right, this isn't something that the Government or Schools should be doing. It's something that PARENTS should be doing. However, with the lack of decent parenting in this country, who else would you suggest should be doing this?

Not the schools, or the government. Besides, doing this might actually be illegal in California, do you seriously want the schools to break laws in order to protect themselves from federal lawsuits?

 

[beowolfe]

The court decision, which interprets several federal laws, says schools are liable for harassment that school officials know about and that “effectively bars” a student’s access to an educational benefit.

Read more: Education Department | Facebook | The Daily Caller - Breaking News, Opinion, Research, and Entertainment

If you didn't get to the second page, you didn't read the reason for this. It appears that a court has held the schools liable for the actions of their students if that actions 'bars' a student's access to an education. So, while the article is trying to paint the feds as the boogey man, it appears they are actually trying to help schools. Whether this is the proper way to deal with this, I'm not prepared to say one way or another without more information.

 

[Anachronism]

Not the schools, or the government. Besides, doing this might actually be illegal in California, do you seriously want the schools to break laws in order to protect themselves from federal lawsuits?

If the Parents WON'T do it and the Schools and Government SHOULDN'T do it, then who is left to oversee these kids?

Personally, I don't see the need for any child to have a phone, cell phone, or social networking account until they're 18, but that's the way I was raised and I understand that is not the way things work anymore.

 

[Finnguy]

Teachers are already over-worked and underpaid. If they have to do this in their spare time, they should at least get pay raises.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

The court decision, which interprets several federal laws, says schools are liable for harassment that school officials know about and that “effectively bars” a student’s access to an educational benefit.

Read more: Education Department | Facebook | The Daily Caller - Breaking News, Opinion, Research, and Entertainment

If you didn't get to the second page, you didn't read the reason for this. It appears that a court has held the schools liable for the actions of their students if that actions 'bars' a student's access to an education. So, while the article is trying to paint the feds as the boogey man, it appears they are actually trying to help schools. Whether this is the proper way to deal with this, I'm not prepared to say one way or another without more information.

You must work for the DOE, you missed the topic sentence when you quoted that paragraph. Let us look at the whole thing.

The department’s re-interpretation expands legal risks for schools beyond those set by the Supreme Court in a 1999 decision, said a Dec. 7 NSBA statement. The court decision, which interprets several federal laws, says schools are liable for harassment that school officials know about and that “effectively bars” a student’s access to an educational benefit.

Read more: Education Department | Facebook | The Daily Caller - Breaking News, Opinion, Research, and Entertainment

How is unilaterally expanding the court definition and usurping the power of the Supreme Court protecting the schools?
​

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Not the schools, or the government. Besides, doing this might actually be illegal in California, do you seriously want the schools to break laws in order to protect themselves from federal lawsuits?

If the Parents WON'T do it and the Schools and Government SHOULDN'T do it, then who is left to oversee these kids?

Personally, I don't see the need for any child to have a phone, cell phone, or social networking account until they're 18, but that's the way I was raised and I understand that is not the way things work anymore.

The discussion is not about cell phones, it is about schools attempting to monitor what children do off campus and using it as a basis for administrative decisions. The point I am making is that this is probably illegal in California, The California Constitution and state law gives students privacy and free speech rights way beyond what they get under federal law.

Answer the actual question I asked and stop dodging, do you think schools should violate the law because the federal government threatens to sue them? That is a yes or no question, not an excuse for you to rant about parents not doing their job.

 

[Anachronism]

Answer the actual question I asked and stop dodging, do you think schools should violate the law because the federal government threatens to sue them? That is a yes or no question, not an excuse for you to rant about parents not doing their job.

So far as I'm concerned children are the Property and Responsibility of the ADULTS who are placed in a supervisory role over them. To that end, it is the Duty of those ADULTS to know what those kids are doing at all times. If it happens on a school computer, or in a time/place that the school has Supervisoriy Responsibility over them, then damn straight they better be monitoring what is said and what may happen because of it. The Constitution of the State of California be damned.

 

[Zoom-boing]

No one because the parents need to step up to the plate and do their job. Just because many don't (keep in mind that many do) does not mean it's now uncle's job.

So what do you do with the kids who you know have parents who will not involve themselves, for whatever reason? Do you simply allow them to fall by the wayside when they fail, or do you spend more and more time, energy, and money trying to "save" them. If you're going to tell me the latter, then YES "Uncle" does need to do that job.

Sucks that there are those types of parents but that does not give the government the right to step in an start doing the parent's job. Failure is a part of life.

Kids having access to F/B at school is asinine and cell phones should be left at the door. As for uncle 'monitoring' them during the evening????? Oh please. What's next? What shows parents allow their kids to watch? How many times a week kids bath? This is fucking ridiculous.

Kids having any form of outside contact during the school day is insane. Again, if the school system is going to be required to be the parent, then YES they should have the right to restrict what the child does outside of the school. If the schools are going to allow these kids to succeed or fail on their own merits, then NO they shouldn't.

That's just it, the school system has no business being any type of parent; they are there to educate not dictate what the kids do in their off time.

As for on-line activities and such in school? Our school has most websites blocked and the kids can only access the educational sites. If the schools were smart they'd collect the kids cell phones as they entered the building and not give them back until the end of the day.

 

[Anachronism]

Sucks that there are those types of parents but that does not give the government the right to step in an start doing the parent's job. Failure is a part of life.

That's fine. Then these kids should be allowed to FAIL. To be held back. To be told that they are failures. To be removed from classrooms to allow the other students to proceed at their pace. THAT is what these schools aren't doing which concerns me. Either FORCE the kids to succeed or ALLOW them to fail. One way or the other.

That's just it, the school system has no business being any type of parent; they are there to educate not dictate what the kids do in their off time.

As for on-line activities and such in school? Our school has most websites blocked and the kids can only access the educational sites. If the schools were smart they'd collect the kids cell phones as they entered the building and not give them back until the end of the day.

I totally agree. They are there to provide a BASIC education. However, society needs to make a decision on something.... Are we going to FORCE these kids to succeed or ALLOW them to fail. If it's the latter, then they need to be allowed to live with the consequences of that failure, not propped up through other programs and tax monies afterwards.

End of the day.... How about end of the school YEAR.