Slashdot Mirror
Australian Teachers Try To Shut Down Website
DeathElk writes "New South Wales teachers are attempting to have a website based in the United States closed down due to "defamatory" content. The site in question encourages students to rate teachers at their school, which obviously results in some colorful content. Now the story has hit the media, with some insightful quotes such as "The president of the NSW Secondary Principals Council, Jim McAlpine, said the Federal Government should block access to 'scurrilous American websites'."
I was just listening to Radio National (oz public radio station) do a story on this. One of the people interviewed said that China is capable of blocking websites from overseas so maybe something similar should start up in Australia. I find it kind of disturbing that people believe that the great firewall is a rational response to the potential slander of some teachers.
every time you try to censor something in today's tech world you end up attracting more attention than if you had left it alone. besides, how can they possibly enforce this? they cant block the site at home or any cyber cafe or anywhere but the school's computers.
Sigs are too short to say anything truly profound so read the above post instead.
Gulp... Hope they don't ban slashdot too ;-(
The man in black fled across the desert, and the gunslinger followed (SK)
most Austrailians I've met in person have been pretty cool people, but there seems to be a large portion of their online population who are big on censorship. At one point I was a very active member on a Stargate message board, but ther was an Aussie admin who was constantly closing threads as "Asked and answered" "No longer relavent" and the best yet "Off Topic" the funny part about the off topic one was that it was in a section of the board specifically labeled as the Off Topic section. I got the board admin in on it (he wasn't usually watching what was going on) and got their over zealous modding slowed down, but I stood my ground. I wasn't going to post anymore unless they reopend some wrongly closed threads, they didn't.
The preceding post was not a Slashvertisement.
Would you prefer the family first party? Half of their platform is to firewall Australia. I'm no liberal fan but we have a pretty good communications minister in Helen Coonan.
As a side note, it's also interesting that the first two posts in response to this story seemed to advocate the censorship instead of considering whether the "defamed" teachers might in fact be unfit. Are Aussies really that OK with censorship?
"We can categorically state we have not released man-eating badgers into the area." - UK military spokesman, July 2007
Who the hell modded that insightful?
How about (-1) flamebait instead?
Optimist: The thumb drive is half empty! Pessimist: The thumb drive is half full...
We'll just post the defamatory content in hexadecimal poems and songs on You Tube!
Teaching is one of very few services whose practitioners are hard to gage until it's too late.
Now you know who sucks, and therefore who to avoid.
I'm sure the ones that suck are really ticked about this.
VLC FOR MAC IS DYING! IF YOU DEVELOP, PLEASE SAVE IT!!
Where was this site when I was at school. I would have loved to issue a report card on some of my teachers.
The quotes about the anonymous principal, in the article? Yeah, I went to that school, she was principal back then, and the comments are 100% spot on. Funny that she'd find her way into the SMH and onto Slashdot ...
I'm an Aussie myself and I'm entirely not surprised. A lot of Australians are well-meaning but conservative, especially the older ones in office - their kneejerk reaction to a situation is to try to make it go away, rather than address the underlying issues.
It is my hope that websites like this will encourage quality teaching and improvement in teacher training/practice, but a lot of people think it's better to brush it under the carpet rather than do the hard yards to satisfy the students.
That said, there's no excuse for spreading falsehoods about teachers who don't deserve it. I really don't rate students to give fairly assess the short-comings of someone who just assigned them homework.
I don't know how similar this is to a site in the US http://www.pickaprof.com/ but I think they are very helpful in allowing students to choose professors or instructors that they will enjoy. I can't count how many times it has helped me choose a prof who averages a full grade point higher than others or who has a teaching style more to my liking.
Its a bit of sad state when we Aussies (teachers in this case) look at that and cant take the piss out of themselves. However the teachers that are targeted as such generally do come off as wankers, the only difference is that students have a medium to express how they feel about them with out repercussions, if half the people i knew from school told the teaching staff how they felt about certain teachers they would cop flak from it, but shock horror really.
... what a fucking joke. Look, I can understand that the teachers feel they are being defamed - they certainly are - but some of the quotes illustrate why this is just an emotional reaction:
(From TFA) "It is clearly an absolute disgrace that people are anonymously able to make comments about teachers that are quite atrocious," she said.
So what? Why should someone's anonymous statement on some website mean anything to these teachers? Can't they just ignore it?
The quote from Jim McAlpine at the end of the article is an absolute disgrace and shows that he is completely out of touch with internet governance, or lack-thereof.
I'm sure Slashdotters will make plenty of disparaging comments towards Australians but this comes down to an irrational, emotional reaction by a small bunch of luddite fuckwits who should know better.
I wash mah-self with a rag on a stick.
Dammit, I wish I'd thought of this when I first got into web design in high school. I was too busy messing around with animated gifs and hunting for Xara 3D keygens.
Whilst trolling is inevitable, a quick look around shows that some (presumably deserving) teachers are getting positive reviews, and that the site isn't just being used for slander and ridicule. I'm going to give students enough benifit of the doubt that they have the discrimination to weed out fud and recognise useful praise and criticism on the site.
If I had known what an utter tool the art teacher at North Sydney Boys' High (Mr. Starling, 1998) was in advance, I never would have set foot in the place. This is a perfect example of what the Web should be for - access to information that empowers users (and in this case, I'll grudgingly admit, their parents) to make the best choices for their growth and development during a crucial period of their lives.
As with many stories, there is more to this than meets the eye.
The NSW Teachers Federation, which is a fairly powerful union here, has been vigorously fighting any attempts to rate the teachers performance and that of their students. Report cards for students are virtually meaningless nowdays and they have fought tooth and nail to prevent the return of the old system. I can't see what justification the Dept of Education has for blocking access to these sites, but as someone who went through the NSW system, I think having a rating site is a great idea. Many of the teachers are less than competent to be teaching our children.
Don't tailgate - the end is near!
"Will no one rid me of this troublesome network?"
I looked up my old school - some of the teachers I had are still there and have been rated. The ratings are right on.
Interestingly someone gave one of the IT teacher low ratings for blocking access to ratemyteachers.com claiming that it deprived teachers of much needed constructive criticism.
Most of the comments I saw were constructive and none were outright abusive. Most also showed respect and that the teachers had developed a rapport with the students. This site is an efficient web based suggestion box I don't think anyone should block it.
Even so, I don't feel particularly censored living in Australia. The USA seems to be having issues with freedom of speech anyway (judging by a few past stories).
In some ways, this isn't that different than students talking behind the teachers backs. At least this way the teachers can find out what the students are saying about them.
When I was a wee lad a long time ago, we used to scribble comments about teachers on the bathroom walls. Often in colorful language and/or pictographs. Kids today just want to tell the whole wide world how bad school sucks.
Just because that's a really good word, and also absolutely applicable to the story as a whole.
"Ladies and gentlemen, my killbot features Lotus Notes and a machine gun. It is the finest available."
Guessing you've never actually lived here...
Australia has thousands of stupid laws that the majority don't agree with, we have an effective way of dealing with these, ignore them.
Many people favour free speech. Fewer support it when people say things they don't like.
It happens on slashdot too - look how people abuse the moderation system to supress opinions with which they disagree..
Your constitution was a remarkable document, granted, but its role as the absolute guarantor of everything under the sun is exaggerated. It didn't protect you from McCarthyism, it didn't protect you (and the rest of the world) from Gitmo, it didn't stop Lenny Bruce from being arrested repeatedly, it didn't stop Lady Chatterley's Lover from remaining unpublished in the United States for decades, and so on. In practice, all it means much of the time is that when community attitudes finally change, it's more often judges rather than politicians who give effect to the change.
Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from a rigged demo
--Andy Finkel (J. Klass?)
Our scurrilous websites? Your fucking kids wrote the stuff!
-Peter
*sigh*
Let me paraphrase what you just said:
-I live in Australia
-I just read a story about censorship / freedom of speech
-despite this, I don't _FEEL_ particularly censored
-However, I have _READ_ stories about the US
-They are worse than Australia
Well, FWIW, I live in the US and I don't FEEL particularly censored either. Guess what--stories are just that, stories. And if your only source of info is a site like slashdot, well, let's just say you might be getting some highly selected and biased info..
No?
Then maybe... just maybe... the site isn't libellous at all.
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
the main issues seem to be that ANYONE can post, there is no moderation and no right of reply. Sure you can say what you want but the target should also have the right to challenge the 'ratings'
There was an unknown error in the submission.
Who wants to live in Australia? Well, I do.
-I live in Australia
-I just read a story about censorship / freedom of speech
-despite this, I don't _FEEL_ particularly censored
-However, I have _READ_ stories about the US
-They are worse than Australia
I only have the media to show me what the USA is like since I am unable to live or travel there myself. Since what we are referring to here are stories on Slashdot, then they are comparable. The original comment seemed to suggest that Australia has a very large amount of censorship. Well maybe we do, but I doubt it is any more so than in America.
News flash for teachers....if you don't want a bad rating on the site...well just demonstrate you can teach.
Censorship that gets in the way of public discourse is blindingly obvious to see - interesting questions stop getting asked in the media.
Of course, part of the problem is that censorship is being seen from the US's point of view. There's a few things you have to understand about the Australian character as opposed to the US to know why censorship in Australia is not as much of a big deal:
* Australians don't see censorship as a slippery slope. As gamers know, censorship is alive and well in Australia, but it's also acknowledged - which means it can be monitored. It's censorship without accountability (like, say, Walmart's refusal to stock certain products if it conflicts with their corporate agenda) that's the real problem, and it's generally pointed out and ridiculed in Australia - indeed, it's a bit of a sport to show up the 'big end of town', and politicians are usually distrusted, and go down in the polls, if they don't have the ability to be open and honest - even if it means backpedalling, as has happened recently with one of the Opposition's policies here. In America, backpedalling is seen as a sign of weakness; in Australia, it's seen as a sign of learning. In America, dodging the question is seen as useful image control; in Australia, it's seen as condescending.
* Australians are individualists - we don't have a national identity, like most countries would understand it. This generally means that we're more sensitive to civil liberties being trampled. (But see next point.) We take mistrust of government, business and the elite to new heights. This can be problematic - we, for instance, demand our elite are also humble, something many intelligent people struggle with; it also tends to breed an anti-intellectual streak - but it's also healthy in that Australians don't need lobby groups to represent our interests, and it's hard to pull a slippery slope on Australians (efforts to introduce more and more censorship would be increasingly pushed back by more and more Australians - game censorship is an anomaly brought about by an extremist Attorney-General, and there's been calls to do something about him at some point, maybe, if we get around to it). (Australia's disdain for America is definitely tied up in this.)
* Australians live in the grey areas. I've seen America's black-and-white nature as a manifestation of the idea of America's manifest destiny - there is a moral code that must be followed, and we just have to work out what it is. The idea of enshrining particular liberties as inaliable is a bit strange to many Australians. There's always theoretically some time where free speech, for example, does more harm than good. On the upside, this also means that Australians abhor extremists - so some of the undesirable effects of free speech, the KKK and suchlike, get shouted down, without losing the value of the principle. This does, however, mean that we give up liberties other countries enjoy without making a fuss, because there's always a good reason for doing so, but we're also more willing to make a fuss when we want that liberty back. The national ID card scheme is a decent example.
I guess you could say that Australia is more chaotic, in the TSR alignment system sense, than America.
> I wonder if truth is a defense against slander/libel/defamation in Australia. It isn't in England
Yes it is, just that the burden of proof is on the defendent, not the plaintiff. Read the article in Wikipedia.
seriously, who gives a shit? anyone, including minor's are entitlied to their opinion and thats all this site does. as long as they aren't making any criminal accusations it's really a non event.
If you mod me down, I will become more powerful than you can imagine....
we had the same problem in Ireland, there was a huge out burst in the media. but the site exploded onto the mainstream.
I think that in a career where you are given authority over young people, it can be very easy to go on some fascist head trip. teachers need to be brought back to reality here;
1. you provide an important service....but your not super-jesus
2. you provide an important service....but we're not going to filter out valid points about you.
3. you provide an important service....but in the real world (that thing outside the class room) you're not in charge.
so teachers are getting an F in public relations from me.
"Stallman says add to this code and you are one of us. Gates says use this code and you belong to us."
The Muse of Irony demands it!
Soylent Green is peoplicious!
The point I'm making is that a) the constitution and the court system is very far from perfect, and b) other nations have their own means of protecting the rights of their citizens, which are also not perfect but work a heck of a lot better than Americans sometimes give credit for, and has sometimes worked better than the US system does.
Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from a rigged demo
--Andy Finkel (J. Klass?)
Considering the name Australia dates back before the USA was formed, I'd say so.
Whilst it's true that in practice Australian teachers will be unable to stop the defamation, it does illustrate a problem directly caused by the growth of the internet. Australia is a liberal democracy and it's defamation laws are rightly a matter for Australians. Internet freedom has the benefit of allowing people to circumvent some of the restrictions imposed by repressive governments, but at the cost of undermining the legitimate interests of sovereign democracies. On balance this is a good thing, but the cost should be acknowledged.
A little known fact: Pohms is actually spelt with a h. Its because its actually an acronym for Property of His/Her Majesty and it originally referred to English immigrants to Australia, rather then English people in England.
We've had the exact same thing for our teachers at Virginia Tech for years.
And the masses cried out, "09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0!"
All my co-workers here at The Department of Education and Training cant wait to get home and look at this site (Its blocked from here through the great DET firewall) they all thought it would be a great laugh to see what the kids are saying about there teaching friends still in the classroom. Performance based pay had been a big issue here recently, we in the office think this would be a great Idea let the kids work out how good the teachers are
I wonder whether the students posting such ratings would mind if they too were rated.
Ratings which would last an eternity on the internet.
eg. Joe Bloggs Student was a lazy, prick, more interested in cheating, being disruptive and time-wasting. Would be a waste of resources for any potential employer.
I'm sure this would fix the problem.
Full of convicts?
Yeah actually. Look at the prison population. America will be full of convicts soon enough. Gotta rejuvenate the domestic workforce somehow.
What?
Sadly, teachers don't seem to be rewarded on any kind of performance basis. From what I've heard (my dad's a teacher, and has taught both primary and high school in the last 15 or so years) 90% of your career advancement as a teacher is achieved through politics, backstabbery, principal's-ass-kissery, and/or going to the right church (in the Catholic system). Whether the kids learn anything is incidendal, and mostly based on the individual teacher's motivation.
I agree that things would be much, much better the way you describe them.
Rampant carbon sequestration destroyed the Dinosaurs' tropical paradise. I'm here to help repair the damage.
I'm happy with that response :-)
I don't have anything against Australia...it's one of my top non-US places I would consider moving to.
I just get tired of everyone assuming / claiming that america is a hellhole of censorship/whatever else..
the teachers involved should sue the websites to get the identities and then sue the posters...
oh wait... that costs money and takes time...
what else could we do... Ah I know... get our union to get the government to block them instead...
la la la la la la... I see no problem.... la la la la la....
Donald 'Duck' Dunn: We had a band powerful enough to turn goat piss into gasoline.
my fear is that with the current state of play* the China thing could very well happen.
*one-party state posing as a two-party state with talkback radio providing the entire political agenda. Australia has a very small media market with 95% of the populace being led along by 2 or 3 media moguls.
Mongrel News all the news that fits and froths
I swear, Australian lawmaking seems to me to lately to be trying to take the knee jerk reaction to an art form. A great example is car accidents, every year some bunch of teenage idiots get in a car and kill themselves. Then the new tougher driving laws come in and make it supposedly harder to get a license, then some more kids kill themselves and the cycle continues. The same is true for the internet, except as far as I know the stupid laws never make it past the "She's a witch, burn her" point.
It seems to me that the media and politician's reaction to anything bad happening is "Ban it" and so far it's obvious to me that it has never worked.
Too true. Painfully true. If you live in Australia and care about the information you're fed, listen to Triple J radio. They may be somewhat left biased (particularly being a non-commercial alternative 'youth' focused network), but they rarely filter, blinker or mold the truth, unlike the other stations.
To get an idea of the kind of deliberate ignorance he's talking about, it wasn't until last year that we finally got around to legalising things like recording a show from the tv watch later. This is despite vhs machines being sold here for ~15 years!
Sure, technology has far outstripped the rate of change of the law, but here it's not till some smart-arse tries to use an outdated law that anyone does anything about it.
IIRC there was an outdated law to close the Harbour Bridge once a year to drove sheep across it which was only revoked recently, and only because someone tried to invoke it.
"If we knew what it was we were doing, it would not be called research, would it?" - Albert Einstein
As it's in writing, it's libel. Slander is only for spoken words.
It isn't really freedom of speech as it is privacy issues. As if whatever you do on the internet or the calls you make are really private. I can pretty much say what I want. Whether I get a visit from the secret service or not is something else entirely. Something that Clinton abused fairly often as I'm sure Nixon did as well. The times I've heard of people getting visited for what they posted in a public forum have been few and far between.
A teacher who starts at 8:30am and knocks off at 3:30pm isn't doing the job. There's time spent preparing lessons, quizzes, tests, etc.; then there's the time spent correcting the aforesaid. There are parent-teacher meetings that normally happen outside of school hours, continuing education requirements (many of which require using up some of that "12 weeks annual leave", or night classes or whatever), and supervising extra-curricular activities (athletic coaches usually get paid extra, but it isn't that much, and non-athletic activities usually don't entail extra pay).
Being a teacher entails acting as a mentor, an arbitrator, a cop, a counsellor, a confidante, a social worker, and many other professions. And then they have to put up with bozos who complain that they are overpaid.
I'm not actually a fan of the public school system; I think it's designed primarily to create sheep who will be docile and obedient workers for industry (for further discussion of that, see the works of John Taylor Gatto and John Holt). My wife and I homeschooled our own children, because we could see that public school wasn't serving their needs or helping them achieve their potential. But to assert that teachers have it easy and don't deserve what they make is utterly ridiculous. It is a demanding, high-stress, low-respect job, and anyone who does it (and doesn't just go through the motions) deserves more respect and salary than they probably get.
As for making $10,000 more than you, without knowing what that is or what you do to earn it, that's a meaningless comparison.
-Mike
I'm sorry; I don't know what I was thinking!
If they'd just ignored it it would have been a nuisance. Now it's a publicity boost and a REAL problem.
It demonstrates that these teachers seem to combine a lack of knowledge about how to deal with students with a lack of knowledge on how to manage publicity as it makes it appear they have something to hide (and they should have known that shutting down the site isn't going to solve this as many others will spring up instead). Duh.
0 marks out of 10 for demonstrating values.
Insert
Or another way to put it might be -- the more you tighten your grasp, Highness, the more planet will slip through your fingers.
The djinni is out of the bottle folks. The djinni is well and truly out of the bottle. If people try to firewall the Internet, you'll have to round up and imprison all your radio amateurs too. Got a copy of an old ARRL handbook out there? You can make a radio with one and enough copper wire & a few fairly easy to make bits. One good ham engineer on either side of the pond to boost a cheap wifi router and you've got Internet again. It wouldn't be a dump truck, or even much of a tube at the start, but you'd have at least as good a connection as the Samizdat network that pulled down another historical wall.
Dang. Sentimental tears. Where's my Pink Floyd collection? I want to hear my -- uh, off-site backup copy of The Wall again...
Do not mock my vision of impractical footwear
Shush you ! I'm typing as fast as I can.
Life is just a bowl of All Bran - Small Faces
Too true. Painfully true. If you live in Australia and care about the information you're fed, listen to Triple J radio. They may be somewhat left biased (particularly being a non-commercial alternative 'youth' focused network),
This may have been true prior to 1989. Remember when they played 'Express Yourself' by NWA all day? Then all those people got the sack and they have been a stupid useless joke ever since.
but they rarely filter, blinker or mold the truth, unlike the other stations.
They also used to do their own news. Now they feed off the common ABC feed. I love getting sport updates on JJJ. Reminds me how far they have fallen. Their news now reflects the upper-middle class crap that the rest of the ABC does.
As an aside I remember when the DJs weren't handed set lists and could actually play anything they wanted. JJJ wasn't just another music industry whore.
... is to start ratemypupils.com!
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
dicks, sometimes.
I heard a teacher from the Uk talking about the UK version of the site, calling for the government to regulate it or shut it down.
His argument was that, he had a series of ten comments about him, eight of which were glowing - utterly positive - but because the other two were a little negative - and not abusive or defamatory, mind - the whole thing was an outrage, and Something Should Be Done(TM).
This guy wasn't just any old teacher either, he was the head of some teacher's union, speaking in an official capacity.
Maybe it's the result of having a constant work environment where the principle relationship with people is one of authority and, perhaps, a lack of firm grounding in that authority, that results in such hypersensitivity to criticism. Whatever the reason, they should get a bleedin' grip.
Corporation, n. An ingenious device for obtaining individual profit without individual responsibility. - Ambrose Bierce
Really gotta disagree with the "one-party state posing as a two-party state" comment, the divide between labor and the liberals is a chasm if you compare it to the republicans and democrats, also, in this country the minor parties do have the possibility to make a difference.
95% of people being led by packer, murdoch and stokes is true and a terrible thing though.
Don't think you can really take offence to the schools filtering their own internet connection though.
There was a proposal back in March 2006 by the Labour party (main opposition) in Australia for a national firewall that was first rejected by the in power Liberal party and then considered. Can't find the original article but there is a couple of quotes here. The idea being
"international websites would be banned by the Australian Communications and Media Authority if they contained graphic sexual or violent material, rated R or higher."
because
"It was "too hard" for many parents to install internet blockers on their computers to prevent offensive material being downloaded"
And an article on the Liberal party considering the proposal here.
Didn't hear much more on it after this, I suppose someone with half a clue had a quiet word with these tossers and let them know just how difficult that would be to put in place and enforce. (I would like to say they decided against it because it's a stupid idea but I imagine it's just because it was too difficult).
Looks like this Jim McAlpine thinks it would be a good idea to put it in place. Apparently great minds think alike, looks like idiots do the same.
I just moved here (Oz) last year, and I have only one thing to say to you: MOVE!
Now! =) Its just as cool as everybody says it is. But that said, this whole censorship vibe is very real. I got an "R"-rated version of Urotsukidoji (sp?) and it was totally butchered, nearly unwatchable. I'm still mad after three months, and the worst is that you can only get the uncensored original either on ebay or at comic shops that will charge you upwards of $60 AUD. And they put this god-awful HUGE color-coded banners in the front cover of all movies advertising its rating and ruining the art, it's disgusting. And a bunch of whiners got to take down an ad from the tv just last month (too lazy to look it up, but there was a /. story) because it might give toddlers ideas. It seems like the population is polarized between all-out liberalism and conservatives-to-the-bone. Not criticizing but pointing out, like I said I love the place. I have also lived in the US and it's a nice place to visit but I wouldn't raise a family there (been at Seattle, Boston, San Antonio, none worth the hassle. Maybe the countryside but I didn't have the opportunity to try that). Not to say that the US is a hellhole either, but here life is more laid back. Australia has something... or maybe they just put hypnotic drugs in the water ;)
+Raider of the lost BBS
.... kommissars of the new fascism.
May the Maths Be with you!
(If it were technically possible,) how would you react to a website where anyone (including potential employers) could search for you and see what your average bug count per 100 lines of code was?
Believing something doesn't make it true. Not believing something doesn't make it false.
This is not at all to suggest that all or a majority of their teachers are bad - Heaven knows we still have enough bad ones in this country too - just that it seems to be a well established problem of the English speaking countries. As is the syndrome of trying to shoot the messenger.
Pining for the fjords
The government in Australia is currently trying to introduce performance based salary for teachers. The teacher's union of course wants nothing to do with it. It is the same problem with the kids not getting report cards with grades. If you can't tell how good someone is at something how are you suppossed to help them improve or steer them into life choices that will allow them to rely on their strengths? I fully believe in performance based systems as it allows me to be competitive and say Ha ha I'm better than you =)
of course if they posted total shit on there i'd clip their fucking ears to.
If you mod me down, I will become more powerful than you can imagine....
I'm natively from North Carolina, and have lived a couple places there, then Chicago, now DC-area. Of all of them, I have to say that I'm not happy living in DC area...too built up, too many people, too crazy, too EXPENSIVE. I liked Chicago a lot, it was a great place to spend a couple years, but I'm just not that much of a city person.
Thanks for the perspective!
While I understand the feelings (and I do think people should decide for themselves what is suitable and not), I always think these arguments lack some consistency when viewed rationally.
First of all: "I'm in favour of preventing my children from seeing certain websites and images that are harmful to them."
This would be more convincing if anyone could actually show how pr0n (I assume that's what you're talking about) is actually harmfull to anyone when viewed. And if it were, how is it possible that it is o so harmful to children, but becomes unharmful the moment they turn 18? It just doesn't make any sense. In the USA, it is even deemed to be 'harmful' if kids see a booby...but at the same time they can watch a movie with a rather hefty dose of violence without any problem - while one could reasonably argue that violence is much more harmful than sex. The fact one has a great tolerance for the first, but almost none for the latter (at least in the USA) is completely nonsensical. I always wonder about parents who freak out about that; I mean, did they only started to look at 'dirty pictures' when they were 18 year or older? Myeah, right. If I remember correctly, the kids at my school (and I myself) where watching playboy-magazines (some kid snatched from his parents) LONG before we were 18. People should get a grip; it's part of life, and kids are curious and on itself it's anything but 'harmful'. I would rather argue it is unnatural to never have encountered sexual-themed topics before you're 18 years old (like in some parts of china, where married copples sometimes don't even know how to do 'it', even when they are 20+ years old). Teenagers will NOT die or get a trauma just by viewing sexual things, I assure you. In fact, I'm quite sure they actively go searching for it on the internet (I would have, if the internet had existed back then). There is no real harm done, it's just something people invent as an excuse to prevent their kids watching stuff they don't like because of their morals. And often they are hypocritical about it on top, because those same parents often DO watch it themselves, despite their proclaimed moral high ground. The idea that it would be harmful to minors while adults can watch it without any harm is truly absurd: not only has no scientific research demonstrated any actual harm, there is no basis whatsoever to argument it harms when being -18 and it doesn't when one is 18+. That concept is just crap, and I think most of us know that, deep down.
"I'm in favour of preventing adults viewing material that either encourages them to commit crimes against children or harms children in making the material."
I'm not completely getting this one neither. Preventing *adults*? You mean if kids view the material it would be ok, this time? Or do you mean 'everyone'? Is there any scientific proof that viewing material encourages crimes? And if that is the case, shouldn't all films where someone is killed be prohibited too, since it would encourage murder? Once again, the argument would be more convincing if there would be a bit more proof and consistency instead of conjecture. And while I agree in most cases it could mean children are harmed, what are you going to do about cases like the one mentioned on slashdot some months ago, where a teenager of 14 made some sexual webcam-recording of himself and now faces a 10-year prison sentence because of 'possesion of childporn'? Made by himself of himself! Just shows how stupid and overboard some laws have gone. I'm all for the protection of children (though the 'save the children' mantra has been overused as it is), but it's ridiculous to imprison a kid to 'protect' him from 'abuse' by himself. One could as well put teenagers in jail because of indecent behaviour with minors when they wank themselves, then. I understand the argument of protecting kids from harm, but I think it often has more to do with imposing morals than anything else, because otherwise, one could not argument against allowing it in the above case.
"I'm in fav
--- "To pee or not to pee, that is the question." ---
(stops to take breath, giggles)
Ha hah ha ha hah ha hah ha ha ha hah ha ha hah ha hah ha ha! Hah ha ha ha hah ha hah hah ha ha ha hah! Ha hah ha ha ha hah! Ha ha hah ha hah ha ha hah ha hah ha ha hah hah hah ha hah ha! Ha hah ha ha hah ha hah ha ha ha hah ha ha hah ha hah ha ha! Hah ha ha ha hah ha hah hah ha ha ha hah! Ha hah ha ha ha hah! Ha ha hah ha hah ha ha hah ha hah ha ha hah hah hah ha hah ha!
Oh fuck - you're serious, aren't you?
I might agree with you if she did one thing: took Rupert Murdoch's cock out of her mouth...
What part of "a well regulated militia" do you not understand?
Become a political journalists or any number of whistleblowers against the current admin (and have true insider knowledge) and see how you feel.
My bet is that you will say that there is way too much censoring.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
The only reason why the incompetant teaches in kangarooland haven't gone to court
As opposed to the ones that taught you to spell?
Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean there isn't an invisible demon about to eat your face
These sites should be encouraged, and not prohibited. My daughters in college have found professor rating sites invaluable in avoiding 'losers' that are institutionalized into the system. There may be derogatory comments about some but the averaging of many comments provides more enlightenment to potential students than is does danger to the professors. Of course many of the 'losers' won't want to be discovered. I wish I had resources like this back when I was in school.
Use your head, can't you, use your head,
You're on earth, there's no cure for that - S. Beckett
Firstly one of my parents and other relatives are currently teachers in the NSW school system, so I have some insight into this issue. I have listened to my dad talking about this particular website. This probably also makes me biased somewhat.
A few things need to be considered here.
Firstly the problem is that the feedback is largely anonymous. You have to ask would these students walk up to the school principal and make these complaints in person? In a lot of cases they would not. Any derogatory comment made anonymously is a comment made by a coward. Because the feedback is anonymous students probably exaggerate greatly. It can't be treated as a meaningful indication of a teacher's ability. Students will be more likely to comment/rate when they think negatively, students who are happy with their teachers will generally not bother.
Another issue is the affect this has on good teachers. I have heard of one particular teacher in NSW who was scared to go into the classroom because she knew that the person who posted some aggressively negative comments would be in the room. For young teachers entering the system it can be difficult to handle. How would you like it if in your job you were openly discredited so publically by a group of immature teenagers? Negative comments about a teacher is likely more a reflection of the students in that particular class than the teacher.
For people who think teachers should be held accountable, consider this... In NSW teachers are paid quite poorly and generally not held in a high regard by the general community. Accountability doesn't necessarily mean that teaching standards will improve, it could actually lower the standards. What intelligent person would want to become a teacher in NSW with all the crap they have to deal with.
Anyway I actually don't support censorship. So despite all I have written I don't think the website should be closed down. But perhaps what is needed is for the website to allow teachers to respond, not sure if it currently allows this? But these ratings should not be taken seriously and won't be taken seriously by sensible people. So teachers should just ignore the comments.
Political journalist? Ahh yes, the case of the journalists who went to jail refusing to reveal their sources who revealed classified information. Somewhat ironic, really. Journalist goes to jail to protecg a secret, when they in turn were part of spilling someone else's secrets. That's the life of investigative reporters though, they do a lot of risky things.
Anyway, back to the situation at hand--if you recall, the arrested journalists were caught in the wake of Mr. Patrick Fitzgerald's investigation. He was INVESTIGATING the current administration. I doubt the administration was putting a lot pressure on Fitzgerland to arrest journalists who could potentially incriminate their officials.
You might also have picked up on the irony that they DID manage to publish articles--they weren't censored at all!
The very fact that you know about these alleged whistleblowers, and journalists that YOU apparently think there's a problem with (care to point it out?) again shows how wrong you are about censorship.
I'm a teacher in New Zealand and many of the schools here in NZ are listed on this site. I think this site is actually beneficial. Most on the comments on there are positive and constructive. Some are not. I think the moderators do a reasonable job removing imature slander etc. Anyway I think it's cool but then i would say that because my feedback so far has been sweet! If i had negative feedback on there then it might give me a hint that i might need to change my teaching practice.
I think the key problem is to find a way to enable the debate without letting defamation creep in. I disagree /entirely/ with trying to shut the site down because that is blunt censorship, but there has to be accountability.
How to impose that without violating the right to privacy is another matter, but it's not right that you go and call someone names without being responsible for your words - what's to stop someone maliciously claiming one of those teachers does strange things with furry animals (I'm keeping this light, I'm sure you can come up with worse)?
So, I think the site idea is good, even though teachers may not like it, but it needs moderation, right of reply and accountability without voiding the anonymous nature (as that would otherwise stop the debate for want of damage to grades and/or expulsion).
Bottomline, however, is that there appears to be quite a disconnect between teachers/management and the students. It would be wise for the teachers to start thinking about that and maybe find a solution for debate closer to home. This is what leadership (and teaching) is supposed to be about..
Insert
Much Like on Slashdot, and that system works not too badly here.
Do you want Anonymous Cowards teaching your kids?
Reduce, reuse, cycle
Sorry, ignore that. Replied to the wrong thread.
Governments shutting down websites cause of negative reviews/disparate policies? (eye of the beholder)
Game producers shutting down websites cause of negative reviews? (eye of the beholder)
Tell you what, why don't we just gag everyone. Who needs free speech? Who indeed...Karem
When all is said and done, nothing changes...
IANAL but it strikes me that no responsible adult takes a child's tales about his teachers at face value. So a teacher's reputation is immune to damage from the facial content of children's posting and children are therefore incapable of defamation.
For example, an adult reading a child's comments on their English teacher is likely to attend to the spelling and grammar of the child's post to the exclusion of the content, and judge the English teacher on his pupils facility with the English language. The child's comment is a raw fact from which the adult draws inferences but from which he does not receive instruction. "Excellent. Marking might seem harsh, but it's generally the standard for a VCAA assessment." The child views the teacher's job as helping him prepare for examinations. On this page we learn that children tend to make criticisms using little anecdotes.
In order to be defamatory Rate My Teachers would have to draw adult inferences from the children's comments itself. Another way in which it could be defamatory would be for adults to post fake comments contrived to induce other adults to draw adverse inferences about the teacher concerned. I don't see this second concern as realistic, but think about the logic of the point: you cannot hope to damage a teacher's reputation merely by posing as a child and posting childish derogatory comments. It encapsulates why I believe children are incapable of defamation.
--- :BASE 16))
(LET ((X 1712932117217129021) (Y 7738940005121702779) (Z 251802448144455281))
(FORMAT NIL "~16,32,'0r" (+ (* X Y) Z)
It only takes one -- even anonymous -- accusation of being a kiddy-fiddler to destroy a teachers career, peace of mind, and possibly liberty. It also doesn't seem to have occurred to most of the posters here that many of the students could be taking revenge on a perfectly decent teacher for giving the student a bad grade that they deserved.
I piss off bigots.
Furthermore a teacher has to be able to assume authority in the class. After all part of his job is to teach kids how to behave. Now imagine a mediocre teacher that has got a bad rating on this site. I don't think that this rating will help him control the kids. Of course we could argue that all the mediocre teachers should be fired, but right now it is difficult for schools to attract good employees. They don't get better employees by firing the worst 25% of the teachers.
If a weak teacher cannot control a class, then it is important that other teachers offer to help out. In the worst case one of them have to take over the class. The result is that the worst classes aren't given to the worst teachers. If the system works well, then the good teachers must feel that they get some social credit by taking over troubled classes. The problem is that this social credit is not visible on ratemyteachers, and that is destructive.
The one I was originally told was POME - Prisoner of Mother England (disclaimer: I'm English). However, 5 seconds with Wikipedia suggests that both are false backronyms and pom/pommy was either an abbreviation of Pomegranate, or rhyming slang for Tommy.
The problem is, in practice, its weight is much greater than that.
I had this debate once before, in a slightly different context where a jealous ex was posting doctored e-mails from when we'd been going out on forums read by mutual friends. I happened to mention this anecdotally on Slashdot, during a discussion about freedom of speech. I was told a variety of unconstructive things, most of which boiled down either to accusations that it must all have been my fault or she wouldn't have done it; or to claims that it was just words, trying to get the (untrue, hurtful) posts removed was censorship, and I should get over it.
Well, in the way of these things, I did get over it in time. There was relatively little lasting damage in that case. But now, come back to the case under discussion here. The underlying problem is the same: on the Internet, everyone can be a publisher to a wide audience, almost instantly, and effectively without having to accept any responsibility for what is said. Sometimes you can post anonymously. Even when you don't, and what you say is genuinely damaging, it's rarely enough to make a court case for defamation worthwhile. You can simply get away with hurtful behaviour, under the pretense of free speech.
So, newsflash for the younger generation: with freedom comes responsibility. I will respect your freedom of speech, as long as you accept responsibility for what you say, and that there may be consequences for you if what you say is unfairly damaging to others. If you will not accept that responsibility, then I have no problem whatsoever with arbitrarily restricting your freedom of speech.
In this case, those of us with friends and family in the profession can immediately tell you the consequences of web sites like this. They result in a few outstanding teachers being recognised for the gifts that they truly are. They result in a few truly poor teachers being recognised for the liabilities that they are. And they result in a lot of competent teachers, doing a very difficult job for relatively little money, being bad-mouthed by so many brats who think they know better that they start leaving the profession, to take on less demanding, better paid jobs that bring far less benefit to society.
The bottom line is that after a while, even if you're a pretty decent teacher, the negative comments start to hurt. Even if you're pretty sure that they aren't really true, doubts creep in. You find yourself second-guessing whether you've made big mistakes, failed to do the right thing, let someone down. That leads you to steering the safe course, not the right one, when you're working with the kids in your classes. And that, ultimately, degrades the quality of the kids' education and makes things worse for everyone. Whether you recognise that before or after you wind up leaving for less stressful work doesn't really matter: the end result is still that the teaching world loses a valuable asset, and a good person is left feeling bad.
So, next time you're making a principled argument for free speech that doesn't mention the word "responsibility", or shouting "sticks and stones" from the cheap seats, please stop and consider whether the entirely one-sided approach you are advocating really represents the kind of world you want to live in when taken to its logical conclusion.
If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
I know an Aussie/Brit/married-an-American who was traumatized by Aussie education. "They made us wear panties in the school colors! PANTIES!" But her school was in Adelaide. So kids in Adelaide: your turn to get into the act and rate your schools.
Teachers work hard. My fiancée started teaching full time this year. I'd say she works about 50 hours a week minimum and probably more like 55 most weeks. She plans lessons on the train on the way to school. Any free periods or lunch times when she isn't on playground duty she does planning (or photocopying stuff, looking for tapes/through textbooks). Weekday afternoons and a few hours on weekends are taken up with marking, and possibly more lesson planning. This last holidays she did have a pretty good break from work, but that really only gave her a chance to catch up with friends, do stuff around her house and do some planning for our wedding. She had neglected both of these for most of the school term. Its much harder than I work (full time uni CS, part time work) and harder than I will work doing programming once I graduate.
brilliant! For me this will go down as one of the most insightful summations of our society i've read. Only comment i'd make is that the level of apathy can become frustrating in the face of government stupidity.
I just checked out the high school in my town, and the thing that struck me was how many "smiley faces" (good teachers) vs. "frowny faces" there were. I didn't count, but I'd say the number of teachers the kids are rating as bad is under one-quarter. Maybe the teachers are tech-savvy and pumping their ratings, but I'm not so sure; the kids in this town are as plugged-in as can be. All in all, I think that if the kids are flaming a teacher on this site, the teacher ought to take it as a wake-up call that he/she is doing something wrong. The kids have an appreciation for the value of the education they're getting from a teacher. My fifth-grader may hate her challenging math assignments, but she loves her math teacher, and I think she would rate the woman as a good, but challenging teacher.
"Who controls the past controls the future. Who controls the present controls the past." -- George Orwell
Australia has thousands of stupid laws that the majority don't agree with, we have an effective way of dealing with these, ignore them.
Hey, we generally do that in the US. I'm pretty sure the UK and Canada does it as well. The thing isn't that you are ignoring some immoral law. The thing is "they" could pick you up and nail your ass at any time for not following any of a dozens of said immoral laws. The problem is that although the UK was outraged about the entire Big Brother concept from the book, the UK government thinks its a grand idea and is trying to get it rolled out in London as as politically possible. (It may take a generation or two but they are getting there.) I think the other "free" governments are taking a wait and see outlook on the London experiment before going out and copying them.
It's pretty hard to ignore immoral laws when ever square foot of land is recorded and monitored by living people.
If I'm not mistaken, the TV case has been covered for some time (I seem to recall reading it in the legislation at least 6-7 years ago). I think copying CDs to iPods (etc) has recently been made legal though?
Sure, why should our laws that protect our freedom matter when you in another country are pissed off at us?
Sounds like the WTO to me. Breaking down sovereign borders and creating one lowest common denominator world.
---- Booth was a patriot ----
I love it when people try to "strike back" at the "horrors" of the Internet. I would love to live in a world where people don't complain this much. Boohoo. You were "defamed" by your students? So what? Suck it up or fight back in like. Don't complain about the big scary American monster to a higher authority.
I'm no liberal fan but we have a pretty good communications minister in Helen Coonan.
Define "good."
I'd say that she is to her portfolio as Jack the Ripper is to nursing. Still, in her defence she saw the gaping problem we have here - too many diverse opinions in the media - and she fixed it by stripping away the media ownership laws. Now finally a media mogul can own just about every media outlet in the land! About time too. Rupert was happy. Kerry would have been proud.
Broadband? Who needs that crap! The Liberals managed to stall it long enough and give Telstra a free pass - our tax dollars at work. Digital TV? What? After nearly a decade of pushing it, they still haven't given anyone a reason why they should bother. Communications in the bush? Well, if a farmer lives in the middle of nowhere, it's their own lookout. Why should the cities subsidise those rednecks who only go around providing most of the food we eat? Serves them right. Privatisation of Telstra? Well, lets hand pick a board with utter disregard to the public who pay them, and then give them masses of money! Better yet, let's give them a monopoly on the infrastructure we paid for through our taxes, and limited oversight, so that they can screw any newcomers to the game to the wall! Good policy for a happier Australia.
The only way I can characterise her performance as "good" is through the benchmark set by her predecessor, Richard Alston. A man so devoid of technology ideas and understanding that it's a wonder we ever got that new-fangled Intarweb thingummajig here. If he had his way we would've had the longest piece of string on Earth, stretching between the US and Australia, with tin cans on either end staffed by morse-code tappers. Compared to him, Helen Coonan is a shining light in the firmament of policy. Then again, tonight I flushed a few things that compared favourably to Alston in that portfolio.
I have to ask again - on which criteria is Helen Coonan a "good" performer? It's morbid curiosity, but I can't help but pose the question.
The story mentions a specific principal's profile. The principal was characterized as being "rude, condescending, pompous and arrogant" and "Who could allow someone like her to run a school? ... [she] is a terrible principal. She is a bully who does not care about the students or the school's wellbeing, but rather how they appear to the outside world."
l es/sydney/fort_street_high_school/roslynne__moxham
Judge for yourself what you think of the comments in whole. Her name is Roslynne Moxham: You can view her profile here: http://au.ratemyteachers.com/schools/new_south_wa
Public schools provides not only a place for children to learn the basic skills such as math but also a place where they can learn how to socialize with different people in different situations. Most people tend to only socialize where they feel most comfortable. Schools tend to break the students out of that, and make them socialize with everyone.
Will homeschooling provide that? Nope. I have talked to a few people that have been homeschooled, and all of them had some severe social problems, more so than the average person that went to a public High School.
On another subject on Homeschooling, what about the parents "qualifications" for homeschooling? Do they have a bachelors Degree? A Master perhaps? In what subject do they have them on? Are they qualified (ie can do the exercises on their own, instead of saying "I am learning with my child?") to teach all subjects in schools?
I have yet to meet a set of parents that could answer "yes" to all those questions.
Homeschooling is actually worse than Public school.
This is not defamation! This is telling the truth, from the perspective of the students. They after all are the ones best equipped to evaluate a teacher as they are with them every damn day. I read the comments left by those students after I looked them up just to be curious. HA!!! The way they write overall is intelligent and well thought out. They are students who actually CARE about their education. Should they HAVE to be made to suffer under crappy teachers? Hell, you would think that teachers are like some kind of religious figures these days by the way people kiss their bloody asses so damn much. People often suck at what they do. Teachers are no diffrent. Some teachers suck a dead goats rear and should have never been teachers to begin with! What is wrong with a few students pointing that out? Good for the students!!! Bad teachers should be fired. Maybe the education systems would be better off, no? We do the same for colleges. Why not other schools? It is good that sites like this exist, maybe teachers that suck will pick up their teaching game and make a difference instead of wasting some kids time and energy. Suckers. BTW to the dumb ass teachers trying to get and American web site shut down, good luck!!! It is never going to happen. Fools....
Nothing is worse than government schools.
Black and grey are both shades of white.
They're not talking about Ratemyprofessors.com, are they? That site is indispensable!
While I'm sure there are many people that rate the teachers based on thier general dislike of their educator, I'm sure there are also many that are willing to give an honest appraisal, positive or negative.
Maybe instead of going on witch hunt, maybe those teachers should sit back and honestly ask themselves what they can do to be better teachers. Maybe they ask for some feedback from their students, the parents and their fellow teachers.
Huh, well thanks. You learn something new every day.
Compared to the nearest private catholic school... My wife is a dance teacher, and handles students from both systems. Overall, the kids from the local public schools are more polite and respectful in class than the catholic school brats. Both of the small local public schools regularly place very highly in the annual N.S.W. Uni academic contests - my daughter included. We love our public school.
I am currently working as an IT Techie in a tasmanian school, it has been a real eye opener for me. The attitudes that teachers have towards other staff members, other teachers and students are all different. I agree with the statement further up the page that teachers have complexes, there must be something in the way they are trained that breeds it. Not to mention their complete lack of common sense when it comes to technology (can't operate a god damned power point???)
That being said not all teachers are bad, just most. And unfortunately the bad ones stand out more than the good ones, also there is a huge difference between high school teachers and college teachers (in this state year 11 & 12 is seperate from 7-10 and we call it college). And as for the comment that they get payed bugger all for a stressful job, they get more than twice my pay in their first year plus they get 3 months holiday to relieve all that "stress". It's always amusing come christmas time when they ask what i'm doing with my 2 months holidays and I tell them that I only have a couple of weeks that aren't all paid holidays.
The bottom line is that teachers aren't the same as other people, most of them have never been out of the education system in their entire lives and that can't be healthy.
Yes and when people are arrested for these stupid laws, the media pick it up, and the people go "err, no, that's fucking retarded" and the law goes away.
If your country is actually ever taken over by tyrants, they're not going to need laws, and they won't care about the constitution.
Maybe there should be a site where teachers can rate students....
I am not a robot. I am a unicorn.
or FBi in Sydney, 94.5 - no playlists, one in 4 songs has NEVER gone to air before, one in 2 songs is Australian, supports independent music and film. No annoying FM-voiced wankers ("you could win CASH !!!") and The Naked City with Jay Katz on Saturday mornings is a hoot.
Mongrel News all the news that fits and froths
I agree completely. FBI in Sydney is a great station. The earlier poster suggested RRR in Melbourne as well. Both are good. Unfortunately I don't live in either city. So my radio choices are nothing.
Thats not entirely true. I still try and listen to Roy & HG and the Coodabeans. Neither are primarily news or music though.
And they says "We are not responsible for users comments" :)
ghostbar page.
Public schools provides not only a place for children to learn the basic skills such as math but also a place where they can learn how to socialize with different people in different situations. Most people tend to only socialize where they feel most comfortable. Schools tend to break the students out of that, and make them socialize with everyone.
Oh, really? Gee, I didn't realize that cramming 30-40 kids of the same age into a room was "making them socialize with everyone."
Will homeschooling provide that? Nope.
We were members of 2-3 different homeschooling groups (mostly overlapping), which got together once or twice a week for educational and social activities. My children (who are now adults) got to make friends with people several years older and several years younger than themselves. Unlike school, where most social relationships tend to be with people within a year or two of the same age as themselves. When I was in school, I hardly knew the people two classes ahead of me or behind me, and we were in a rural/small town setting. Bottom line, socialization is a straw man; our children had the opportunity to get to know a much greater variety of other children than most of those in public schools.
I have talked to a few people that have been homeschooled, and all of them had some severe social problems, more so than the average person that went to a public High School.
Your breadth of experience on the subject astounds me!
On another subject on Homeschooling, what about the parents "qualifications" for homeschooling? Do they have a bachelors Degree? A Master perhaps? In what subject do they have them on? Are they qualified (ie can do the exercises on their own, instead of saying "I am learning with my child?") to teach all subjects in schools?
I have yet to meet a set of parents that could answer "yes" to all those questions.
So what? Learning at its best is an internally-driven process. The best teachers aren't those who use their diplomas for wallpaper, they are those who inspire their charges to learn. Teaching is not about spoon-feeding knowledge to the pupils; it's about getting the pupils to want to know more about a subject, and helping point them in the right direction to find out more. We didn't keep our children cooped up in a classroom and drone at them all day; we made learning interesting, and as a result, ended up with two very gifted and creative individual thinkers. Our eldest scored in the 90th percentile on her SATs, and was accepted by 3-4 different colleges, and did well in her coursework. Our youngest chose not to go to college, as her interests are more artistic than academic, though she is now considering going to school after all (she's almost 22 now). Both have numerous friends and are well-liked by virtually everyone they know and work with
Exactly how would you say we failed them?
Homeschooling is actually worse than Public school.
You haven't met enough or the right homeschooled individuals, and don't have a clue what you're talking about. I was immersed in it for my children's entire childhood, and met numerous well-adjusted, articulate, bright and talented young people and their parents who were giving them the best fundamental educations I've ever seen.
Mind, we weren't the fundamentalist Christian type of homeschoolers who were doing it for religious reasons, such as avoiding having them learn about evolution or being exposed to the sinful ways of the world. We were following the educational philosophies of John Holt and others in the field. We actively participated in our childrens' lives and educations, and we were all richer for it.
-Mike
I'm sorry; I don't know what I was thinking!
I can add that the new.edu.au proxies must be signed into with the student's name. They aren't just filtering, they're watching closely.
It's OK Bender, there's no such thing as 2.
FYI, Australia was established with convicts that Britain couldn't send to America any more because some uppity colonialists there objected to the taxation regime. I understand there were about 50,000 sent.
Slashdot: Where nerds gather to pool their ignorance
> Students wouldn't be considered enfranchised citizens if it was guaranteed, since it's perfectly legitimate to discriminate against residents
> by reason of age. Who wants to live in Australia?
At least the students in Australia can usually travel home at the end of a schoolday . . . and not fear ending up in a mortuary!
(David Bowman, EVA near HUGE Monolithic Win-PC in orbit around Jupiter) "My God - its full of Malware!"
Just a couple of days after I made this post the site came back online.
Damn, lost its effect. I would become active again if the Nazism isn't there.
The preceding post was not a Slashvertisement.