Slashdot Mirror


Student, Denied Degree For MySpace Photo, Sues

gwoodrow writes "We've all heard the 'fired because of MySpace' stories, where a simple blog or picture gets someone canned. But now one of the targets is fighting back. (The offending picture in this case was a snap from Halloween 2005 of the student in a pirate outfit drinking from a cup.)" From the article: "Teacher in training Stacy Snyder was denied her education degree on the eve of graduation when Millersville University apparently found pictures on her MySpace page 'promoting underage drinking.' As a result, the 27-year-old mother of two had her teaching certificate withheld and was granted an English degree instead. In response, Snyder has filed a Federal lawsuit against the Pennsylvania university asking for her education diploma and certificate along with $75,000 in damages."

75 of 823 comments (clear)

  1. umm by otacon · · Score: 4, Insightful

    2005 was 2 years ago, and she's 27 now, that makes her 25 in the photo...how is this underage drinking again?

    --
    In a world of acronyms, the words are the real victims.
    1. Re:umm by hackstraw · · Score: 4, Insightful

      2005 was 2 years ago, and she's 27 now, that makes her 25 in the photo...how is this underage drinking again?

      Wrong. The cup was clearly full of liquid LSD, which is a federal felony.

      I just don't get the human race. It just seems clear that no matter what century it is, there is some kind of witch hunt or persecution of somebody for something. Is there anybody that has read something about this human phenonemon? Is there going to be a time when humans just don't do this kind of thing?

    2. Re:umm by Johnny5000 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      2005 was 2 years ago, and she's 27 now, that makes her 25 in the photo...how is this underage drinking again?

      I'm sure they originally thought she was 20 in the picture, and wanted to withhold her teaching certificate for underage drinking. Then when they found out she was 25 in the photo, they changed their story to not wanting anyone who has had alcohol touch their virgin lips to be teaching young children, rather than admitting they were wrong.

      --
      The libertarian solution to the failures of capitalism is to apply more capitalism til the failures are fixed.
    3. Re:umm by subterfuge · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Is there going to be a time when humans just don't do this kind of thing?

      no

    4. Re:umm by maxume · · Score: 4, Funny

      Are they not allowed to use cups?

      --
      Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
    5. Re:umm by TapeCutter · · Score: 5, Insightful

      This whole thing is simply idiotic, it seems obvious someone is out to "get her" and has convinced enough people to start cranking the wheels of "the complaint process". If it's fair game to investigate this womans life then what about the person(s) who put in the complaint, do they have alternative motivations? - Religion, revenge, nappy-wearing-jelousy?

      A system of formal complaints that can screw up your life must be accountable, if formal complaints are to be taken seriously then abuse of the system needs to be puni$hed.

      --
      And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
    6. Re:umm by inviolet · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I just don't get the human race. It just seems clear that no matter what century it is, there is some kind of witch hunt or persecution of somebody for something. Is there anybody that has read something about this human phenonemon? Is there going to be a time when humans just don't do this kind of thing?

      You already understand that humans are utterly self-centered. Yet many of them have that irresistible desire to control others. It's a paradox, but still frighteningly logical...

      Humans seek to control in others what they wish they could control in themselves.

      They hate it when other people are having more fun than they are.

      And they will cling to their moral rules even after those rules have lost their basis. (Certainly the mutual enforcement of morality is justifiably important in any family, tribe, or society, and certaintly this is an unending chore. But still: moral rules exist to maximize something; they are not divine ends-in-themselves.)

      The current war against birth control illustrates all three phenomena of control:

      1. "I hate my profligate urges, but at least I can feel better about them by cracking down on yours."
      2. "Hey, no fair getting laid twice a week! My husband barely wants me once a month!"
      3. Them: "Promiscuous behavior is immoral because it creates unintentional babies."
        You: "But birth control ends that risk; therefore, there is no longer any basis for condemning promiscuous behavior. Your moral rule is obsolete."
        Them: "Then to protect morality, we must ban birth control."
      --
      FATMOUSE + YOU = FATMOUSE
    7. Re:umm by got2liv4him · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The current war against birth control illustrates all three phenomena of control:

      1. "I hate my profligate urges, but at least I can feel better about them by cracking down on yours."
      2. "Hey, no fair getting laid twice a week! My husband barely wants me once a month!"
      3. Them: "Promiscuous behavior is immoral because it creates unintentional babies."
        You: "But birth control ends that risk; therefore, there is no longer any basis for condemning promiscuous behavior. Your moral rule is obsolete."
        Them: "Then to protect morality, we must ban birth control."

      Isn't that what they call a straw man argument... I mean look at number two, you are invoking your opinion on why people believe certain things (it must be that they aren't getting any, so they don't want me to). You have put those with different opinions than you in a box, and then made up there thoughts so you can be better than them... isn't that what your post was complaining about in the first place?

      --
      King of kings and Lord of lords
    8. Re:umm by mikael · · Score: 5, Informative

      This is the picture that is actually in dispute, described in this news article

      Apparently, Conestoga Valley School District were threatening to not recruit any more teachers from her university, unless she was punished in some way.

      Regardless of the picture, the School District or college have no right to amend her graduation qualifications, based on a single party photograph.

      --
      Vintage computer adverts: http://www.vintageadbrowser.com/computers-and-software-ads
    9. Re:umm by Saxerman · · Score: 5, Informative

      I'm guessing that other pictures show underage drinkers at the party.

      That's what I though too, and since I figured at least one of us needed to actually RTFA I did. Strangely, that archive doesn't mention any other pictures:

      So what, you're probably asking yourself, could have been in this picture that was so abhorrent as to make Stacy Snyder unworthy of teaching children? Was she force-feeding a 6-year-old bourbon from a bottle or spiking a middle school dance's punch? Not even close. The picture in question turned out to be of her at a Halloween party in 2005 dressed as a pirate and drinking an indeterminate liquid "from a plastic 'Mr. Goodbar' cup." But underneath was a caption which read "Drunken Pirate" and that caption apparently lead faculty to assume she was too "unprofessional" to educate young minds. Word was sent to the Millersville administration, and Snyder's "lifelong dream" of being a teacher ended less than a day before being achieved.

      --

      A steaming cup of soykaf would be real wiz right now.

    10. Re:umm by pnewhook · · Score: 4, Funny

      I'm sure they originally thought she was 20 in the picture, and wanted to withhold her teaching certificate for underage drinking.

      Well the solution is simple. Adopt a drinking age of 17/18 like here in Canada. She definitely doesn't look 18.

      Then when they found out she was 25 in the photo, they changed their story to not wanting anyone who has had alcohol touch their virgin lips to be teaching young children, rather than admitting they were wrong.

      Alcohol?? Forget the alcohol. Statistically at least half of the female teachers would be performing oral sex on their husbands / boyfriends. And they are worried about alcohol on their lips?

      --
      Tesla was a genius. Edison however was a overrated hack who liked to torture puppies.
    11. Re:umm by Phyvo · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The fact is, children require sacrifice, and when given the option many people will just avoid sacrificing. This is why in Europe and Japan population is declining, and why, unless a new pro-family and pro-child secular ethos is created, religious people will be the ones keeping society going.

      Now, I'm not saying that birth control is all a bad thing. My parents used birth control (but they still had 3 kids), my sister and her husband are using "natural" birth control (because she's allergic to something, I think). But it has had bad unintended consequences. A society with no children is a society with no future.

    12. Re:umm by aplusjimages · · Score: 4, Funny

      wrong. There will be a time. It's called the Extinction Period.

      --
      Can I bum a sig?
    13. Re:umm by Wolfger · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Teachers, like many others, must maintain separation between their personal and professional lives.
      Uh... A MySpace page is definitely personal, and not professional. I don't think that this poor lady has any problem whatsoever making a distinction between personal and professional. I think it's the school, the initiator of the complaint, and apparently you who have problems with maintaining that separation. It's already hard enough to get good teachers, without asking them also to give up their humanity for the sake of the job. What any teacher does on his or her personal time, whether or not they talk about it or post pictures on their personal website, is their own damn business.
    14. Re:umm by UbuntuDupe · · Score: 3, Interesting

      You can correct the relative population growth rate by increasing reproduction rates of the non-religious, OR by increasing the death rate of the religious.

      So I guess it's not such a bad thing that red-staters are the first to volunteer for wars ...

    15. Re:umm by pipatron · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Check out http://www.vhemt.org/ for some thoughts about a future without children.

      --
      c++; /* this makes c bigger but returns the old value */
    16. Re:umm by pipatron · · Score: 3, Funny

      ...matriarchal transfer of property To be honest, it's not very often you hear about someone giving birth to a child without knowing who the mother is.
      --
      c++; /* this makes c bigger but returns the old value */
    17. Re:umm by eck011219 · · Score: 3, Funny

      Yeah. Not all photos get you exiled for life, though. In the case of the photo I linked to, it's quite unfortunate.

      --
      It is pitch black. You are likely to be eaten by a grue.
    18. Re:umm by pipatron · · Score: 3, Interesting

      God commanded, "Be fruitful and multiply." To who did God say this? Did God say how long we should multiply? Until there is no more room left on land? Until there is no more food left? Humans have multiplied for many years, maybe God think it's enough now? Without knowing much about when God gave this command, I can still be quite sure we have multiplied by at least a factor of one million since then, eradicating many species since then. Was this what God intended?
      --
      c++; /* this makes c bigger but returns the old value */
    19. Re:umm by James_Duncan8181 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Of course, the fact that it's not your life would mean that you should frankly STFU and stop attempting to impose your own morality through bad law. That's the essence of a theocracy, you know...

      --
      "To any truly impartial person, it would be obvious that I am right."
    20. Re:umm by TheGavster · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Except that promiscuous behaviour isn't immoral because of unintentional babies at all.

      You have missed the point of the argument. A group opposes promiscuity on moral grounds. Moral grounds are not a valid reason to pass a law, so they develop a related social issue, unintentional babies. When their social issue is ameliorated while still allowing people to partake in the "immoral" activity, they try to ban things in an effort to restore the social problem.

      In any case, not everyone who has sex for pleasure is doing it as a fling. Many people in committed relationships simply do not want children, and thus partake in sex via safe means.

      --
      "Because Science" is one step from "Because old book". Try "Because of my experiment testing my falsifiable assertion".
    21. Re:umm by Mr.+Slippery · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It's immoral to people that consider that you should dedicate yourself to a relationship with one person.

      It is perfectly fine for you to decided that you want to dedicate yourself to a relationship with one person. If you ask my opinion about the potential pitfalls along that approach, I'll tell you want I think, but tell you, "knock yourself out - whatever works for you".

      It is not ok for you to decide that I should dedicate myself to a relationship with one person; you don't get to dictate what style of relationship makes me happy, any more that you get to decide what sort of music makes me happy. You are free to report your own experiences, preferences, even speculations: but when you attempt to tell me how I "should" love, you've left the realm of useful discourse. And when attempts are made through public policy to dicate how people "should" love, a sane society would hand those poltiicans a whuppin'.

      People don't outlaw breaking and entering because they are jealous that they can't crack safes, etc.

      Non sequitor. B & E is a violation of the rights of others; if my girlfriends and I decide to have open relationships, that's not a violation of anyone's rights.

      I have no problem with birth control myself, but I do have a problem with people being promiscuous,

      What in the world does that mean, that you "have a problem" with other people's personal sexual choices? How does my choice cause you any problem?

      I think it's extremely shallow, and in the end just leads to loneliness.

      I hear a lot more discussion and thought from the polyamoury community about the nature of relationships than I do from most folks, so charges of "shallow" fall flat. And I see honest non-monogamous models working quite for many people - certainly much better than the dishonest non-monogamous model that condemnation like yours pushes people into.

      Again: whatever works for you, fine and dandy. But your opinions about the choices of others seem based on faulty data.

      --
      Tom Swiss | the infamous tms | my blog
      You cannot wash away blood with blood
    22. Re:umm by Wakko+Warner · · Score: 5, Insightful

      You have put those with different opinions than you in a box, and then made up there thoughts so you can be better than them... isn't that what your post was complaining about in the first place?

      Is it really that hard to believe that people who hold certain opinions and then attempt to force those beliefs onto others really are shittier people?

      --
      "Remember when the U.S. had a drug problem, and then we declared a War On Drugs, and now you can't buy drugs anymore?"
    23. Re:umm by Kadin2048 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      A theocracy doesn't sound bad to me as long as the government is just following a good set of beliefs rather than creating new ones.

      And that, right there, is what I find most terrifying. People think that an arational theocracy is OK, if the beliefs that it's imposing on others is "good" in their estimation -- meaning that it's their set of beliefs. Of course, What's "good" is highly subjective. There are a lot of people in the world who think that Sharia law is just fine and dandy, and we'd all be a lot better if we buried cheating women up to their heads in sand and stoned them to death. Once you've accepted the premise that arationality is acceptable in government, it's just a matter of degree how far you decide to go in impressing your superstitions on everyone else. You may draw the line at just telling people who they can have sex with, while someone else may go further and tell them what clothes they can wear -- there's no difference in kind there, just of degrees.

      Either you reject theocracies on premise, or you have to accept nearly all of them, since there is no rational basis for presuming that any one set of superstitions is superior to any other.

      --
      "Ladies and gentlemen, my killbot features Lotus Notes and a machine gun. It is the finest available."
    24. Re:umm by geminidomino · · Score: 4, Funny

      I have a picture I captioned "Lord and Master."

      I've yet to receive any taxes from my serfs...

    25. Re:umm by Adambomb · · Score: 4, Funny

      Don't worry, the damned dirty apes will be there to mock it.

      --
      Ice Cream has no bones.
    26. Re:umm by Xiaran · · Score: 4, Informative

      I was raised a Catholic and from what I recall(its been a while) the opposition to contraception is based on the position that man doesn't have the right to judge weather someone can live or die. Only God has that right. Hence the church opposes capital punishment, abortion and birth control. The birth control argument is that man is interfering with the natural course of God plan... or whatever. I don't agree with their stance n birth control or abortion but I can have some sympathy for the capital punishment one.

      Also I think most Catholics, at least in the west, pretty much ignore the whole no condom/no pill business. I know most of my (pretty Irish catholic) extended family do.

  2. No BS please by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    No bullshit please, clearly she was denied her degree due to pressure from the RIAA. Dressing as a pirate and so on...

    Arrr.

    1. Re:No BS please by MishgoDog · · Score: 5, Funny

      Actually, it was the Flying Spaghetti Monster who saw her wearing the holy garb, and thus must give up her life of 'teaching' and preach the good word.

      So, not for the first time, he noodled the School Board...

  3. Define "promoting"? by VE3OGG · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I would like to see the page in question, since "promoting" and "here's a picture of people with a beer" are two very different things (but of course, can be interpreted any way the viewer wishes). Sigh -- MySpace to the rescue of society's morals an ethics again...

  4. Well by El+Lobo · · Score: 5, Interesting
    I for once am sick of this new wave of neo-moralism which is invading the USA, but sadly also Europe. It has gone so long now that there have been students in trouble (and expelled from an university), here in Sweden for just ben caught drinking a beer when they are 17. Can you imagine? A beer can compromise the future of a person... Long gone are the merry days of the hippy culture when things were so uncomplicated...

    But I must be thankful that the new wave of religious moralism has not (yet) arrived here from America... But sadly, I expect it to arrive very soon...

    --
    It's time to realise that Abble's products are the biggest abomination these days. Just say NO to the dumb iAbble way!!
    1. Re:Well by braintartare · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It is not neo-moralism as much as it is simple cowardice. People in authority today, more than ever before, are doing the CYA thing regardless of the consequences to those under their authority. This judgement is sad, sick, absurd, wrong. But the people who made the judgement ( withhold her certificate ) thought that this was the safe course of action, that they were protecting themselves from any political fallout. As I suspect we will soon see, they couldn't BE more wrong. /chandler bing

    2. Re:Well by TheWoozle · · Score: 5, Insightful

      You don't have to be religious to be self-righteous, authoritarian, or just a plain old bastard.

      --
      Insisting on "correct" English is like saying that there is only one, definitive recipe for chili.
  5. So what they're saying here is... by Churla · · Score: 5, Funny

    "It's OK for a drunken pirate to have a pretty useless degree, but we'll be damned if we're going to enable a drunken pirate to get a low paying stressful thankless job by giving them a certificate!"

    Obviously ninja have infiltrated the schools administrative staff...

    --
    I'm a fiscal conservative, it's a pity we don't have a political party anymore
    1. Re:So what they're saying here is... by Churla · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Actually, I do pay property taxes as a home owner. I also know people who work in the teaching profession in the same city in which I pay these strangely high taxes. And in my brain I've made a note to someday figure out where the money is going because it's not going to the teachers.

      And whereas yes they do get 3 months a year off, most of the don't make enough to avoid needing to get a summer job. Many of them are either working on grading papers and preparing lesson plans at home, or they're putting 12 hour days in at the school keeping up with some of it. The worst part is knowing how many of them honestly want to instill that vital critical thinking nugget in the heads of kids, but then get beaten down with the fact that they have to teach to a standardized test because that's what they'll be reviewed over.

      Maybe where you're at the teachers job is a cushy one, but from my observations in a non suburb city it isn't. The only teachers I know who are thriving and loving the job all teach at private schools, and there aren't enough of those jobs to go around.

      --
      I'm a fiscal conservative, it's a pity we don't have a political party anymore
    2. Re:So what they're saying here is... by Bastard+of+Subhumani · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Ah, but is it over the national average for people with a Master's? Compare like with like.

      --
      Only three things are certain; death, taxes, and apocryphal quotations - Ben Franklin.
  6. Obviously! by Freaky+Spook · · Score: 4, Funny


    Students only go to uni to leech movies and music and drink underage, getting a degree is just a bonus!!!

    1. Re:Obviously! by Don_dumb · · Score: 5, Funny

      Let me correct that for you: -

      only students in the US go to uni to leech music and movies and drink underage, students everywhere else go to uni to drink.

      --
      If this were really happening, what would you think?
    2. Re:Obviously! by backwardMechanic · · Score: 4, Funny

      Except in Germany, where it's younger.

  7. hmm by cordsie · · Score: 4, Insightful

    When I see clearly absurd stuff like this, I tend to wonder whether there are other aspects to the story that we're not being told about.

    I'm not judging either way, but is it not a possibility that the 'victim' here is screaming loudly about a single innocuous piece of evidence while failing to mention any of the other relevant details or bits of evidence in the 'case'?

    1. Re:hmm by Cauchy · · Score: 5, Interesting

      There was more. The school district where she was a student teacher was the impetus behind this. The district told the university that if she was awarded a teaching certificate, the district would stop using student teachers from the university. I'm guessing that the university felt it needed the school district for the broader good of its other teaching students. I'm not saying the university was right to not fight the district to the death, but clearly it was a more rational choice. The school district, however...

    2. Re:hmm by theckhd · · Score: 3, Informative

      Conestoga Valley officials told the college their students wouldn't be allowed to perform student-teacher requirements there if Snyder was not punished, according to the lawsuit.

      From Lancaster Online, a local news outlet. In addition, the article talks about her being "unprofessional" during her student teaching, though whether that was determined before or after the picture was discovered isn't entirely clear:

      Girvin also issued a final student/teacher evaluation of Snyder and granted "superior" or "competent" ratings in all areas except "professionalism." He gave Snyder and "unsatisfactory" rating, according to the lawsuit.

      Buffington also accused Snyder of "incompetence" and "claimed she should have been removed from her student-teaching position months ago."

      Having grown up in the area (several of my friends went to Millersville; at my high school it was often thought of as the 13th grade because so many students from our district went there), this doesn't really surprise me. The stories I've heard from friends who got their degrees at Millersville generally indicated that the school was a pain to deal with on administrative issues, particularly in some departments. I guess the Ed. department is one of them.
    3. Re:hmm by bkr1_2k · · Score: 4, Insightful

      That allegation has been denied by the school district in question. The article below also mentions that she was reprimanded several times (for the same offense) as a student teacher and that she needed "significant remediation" in several areas of her teaching abilities. There is more to the story, but it's generally being told (at least on slashdot) from a one-sided perspective. Here is another side: http://bbsnews.net/article.php/20070502234811315

      --
      "Growing old is inevitable; growing up is optional."
    4. Re:hmm by Cauchy · · Score: 4, Insightful

      That was actually quite an interesting article. I found the following excerpt particularly enlightening:

      "...One of the concerns that Ms. Snyder's cooperating teacher, Nicole Reinking, expressed to Ms. Snyder throughout the semester was the importance of maintaining a professional working relationship with students and not to become overly familiar with them regarding her personal life. Among other things, Ms. Snyder had been inviting students to log onto her MySpace Web site, and Ms. Reinking counseled her repeatedly to stop doing so."

      If this is the case, perhaps the school district and the university were quite well justified. In this case, the issue wasn't the website or the photo, but her conduct in the classroom and with the students related to the website. One might even say that her conduct was encouraging underage drinking not because she drank or took pictures, but because she in essence said to students, "Look, I'm cool, I get drunk at parties." That's much more nuanced than just the fact that she put the pictures up online since it involves actively promoting the pictures in the classroom.

  8. Wow. by geekmux · · Score: 5, Funny

    I thought I was the only one who got hammered off those Goodbar shooters. Whew, that's a relief.

  9. What is the problem? by edbob · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I looked at the picture. I shows an obviously of-legal-drinking-age adult woman in a pirate hat drinking from a plastic cup with no indication of the contents of said cup. How this promotes underage drinking is beyond my ability to comprehend.

    1. Re:What is the problem? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

      It wasn't that picture in particular, it was just that that picture was the only one safe for work. The others show her obviously intoxicated and doing jello-shots off the chest of a well-endowed naked black man.

  10. Not getting a couple things here... by laughingcoyote · · Score: 4, Insightful

    • If the picture is from "Halloween 2005", and she's 27, would she not have been 25 at the time of the photo? How exactly is that promoting "underage" drinking? Am I just really bad at math today, or did they change the drinking age while I wasn't looking?
    • There's not even any clear indication the caption isn't satirical. You can't tell what she's drinking, there are no bottles of liquor anywhere to be seen, and the cup is opaque.
    • Even if she were underage in the photo, and were obviously drinking alcohol, what's that have to do with anything? If you're under the illusion that every teacher in your child's school never touched a drop of alcohol until they were 21, you're deluded, quite dangerously so.
    --
    To fight the war on terror, stop being afraid.
  11. Underage hot chocolate drinking? by El_Muerte_TDS · · Score: 4, Funny

    Well.. that's what the cup says anyway. No sign of beer or stronger stuff. It's not even hot coffee.

    The only reason I could think of to punish her is for the bad pirate costume, and the fact that the plastic cup is out of character.

  12. Re:She was not denied her degree by subterfuge · · Score: 5, Funny

    If its about the pirate thing they should encourage this behaviour as the decline in pirate population is the cause of global warming...

  13. Re:She was not denied her degree by eck011219 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    She was denied the degree she was expecting to get and had worked toward -- I'm not sure why they would change her degree like that, unless the education degree includes the teaching certificate as well. Either way, it's a seemingly arbitrary change by the administration to the outcome of her education that will affect her in her chosen profession.

    It's lunacy -- I heard the story a few days ago and figured there must be more to it, but having read more about it now, I don't think there is. Apparently if you have any semblance of an adult life outside school, you're unfit to teach (according to the Morals Police).

    Reminds me of the Sprout Goodnight Show host and her firing -- she'd been in some short PSA spoofs about sex SEVEN YEARS before she worked at Sprout (which is a 24-hour PBS Kids network), but parents pressured PBS to fire her and they did so. I guess all that matters is that someone thinks something is bad -- that's now apparently enough to make it true. Here's the Sprout story, by the way. My kid didn't seem to care, but I'm sure others did.

    --
    It is pitch black. You are likely to be eaten by a grue.
  14. Ah yes, Pennsylvania by smooth+wombat · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Where our school taxes run deep, Philadelphia and Pittsburgh are leeches and our governor is doing his best to increase the New Jerseyfication of the state.

    I've told people for the longest time, any time PA is in the national news, it can't be a good thing.

    Personally, I don't agree with Millersville (not too far from me) since the activity took place away from school and the teacher to be, as far as I know, has never advocated to anyone that getting drunk is a good thing.

    Further, as others have pointed out, how is she promoting underage drinking if a) she was above the legal drinking age at the time the picture was taken and b) we have no idea what was in her cup.

    Besides, if Millersville is going after her because of something she may have done, are they going to rescind degrees from those who have graduated and are later found to be doing something similar or are convicted of other crimes? Say, child molestation, rape or robbery? What if someone posts a picture of themselves in a thong at a party (as a guy) or some skimpy, revealing outfit (for a woman)? Are they going to withhold degrees for that too?

    --
    We will bankrupt ourselves in the vain search for absolute security. -- Dwight D. Eisenhower
  15. This is Pennsylvania, remember by b0s0z0ku · · Score: 5, Interesting
    The place where you can be:

    (1) Arrested in the hospital for public drunkenness and underage drinking after you are taken to the hospital for alcohol poisoning a day before your 21st bday. This actually happened to a friend. I guess that it's far better to let students with alcohol poisoning choke on their own vomit than go to the hospital and risk getting arrested.

    (2) Arrested for felony riot for telling a cop who had just hit a fellow student in the face at a Red Cross benefit show that he'd be better off helping clean up NYC after 9/11 than harrassing students who ARE actually trying to help. This actually happened to me a few weeks after 9/11/2001, and fucked with my life for the next few years (difficult to get a job, probation basically required for me to move out of state).

    In short; to Hell with the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and the puritanical prigs who seem to run the government and apparently non-governmental organizations as well.

    -b.

  16. Pennsylvania by DaMattster · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I am from and live in, Pennsylvania. Pennsylvania has a strange attitude towards alcohol. It is remarkably easy to get a license to serve alcohol yet liquor is a state run enterprise. It is kind of a schizophrenic balance of control and freedom. If only you should have seen the public outcry when the state liquor store was going to have hours on Sunday. I was vaguely amused because many of those in the public outcry, I am sure, went to buy a bottle of wine on Sunday. This girl is going to win her lawsuit, hands down. What Millersville University did was attempt to flex its muscle. In doing so, that attempt just went way too far and will end up generating negative publicity for an otherwise, fine state school. I hope Millersville's administrators are arrogant and blind enough to see this to a public venue. Universities are supposed to be about academic freedom and thought freedom . . .or maybe once upon a time they were. The egregiousness of this is simply shocking.

  17. The longer I live... by cnelzie · · Score: 5, Funny

    ...the more I understand as to why nobody in Europe wanted those pesky Puritans around and thus kicked them all to the US.

        Sometimes, I really dislike the behavior of some of my fellow Americans.

    --
    If you ignore the other uses of a tool, does that make the tool less useful, or you less useful?
  18. Re:It's the cup by MichaelSmith · · Score: 4, Funny

    Isn't it obvious? People who are underage may only drink from clear, plastic bottles! By using a cup, she was promoting drinking from opaque liquid carrying devices.

    And by being a mother of two she is promoting under age sex as well.

  19. So she's punished for doing something legal? by AmericanPegasus · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Ok, so as I see it, the 'problem' is this: They say they won't give her a teaching degree because the very fact that she was *photographed* with a cup of beer in her hand makes her an unacceptable teacher. You can't do that. This institution cannot impose it's own moral guidelines on it's graduates regarding something that is completely LEGAL. Well, maybe they can, but they can also lose their ACC accreditadion. What if she had been photographed smoking, or watching a rated-R movie, or any other number of legal activites? You can't just deny someone a degree they have worked for years to get, just because you don't approve of their personal choices. I hope she sues the pants off of this college and they award her triple the sum she's asking for. This is blatantly immoral and wrong of the college and I hope they learn their lesson.

  20. Don't you mean by jonathan3003 · · Score: 5, Funny

    Arrr.IAA?

  21. Re:Image is... something. by TobascoKid · · Score: 4, Insightful

    How are they going to feel, knowing that she's a party girl?

    Yeah, because only the truly debauched party at Halloween.

    --
    At some point, somewhere, the entire internet will be found to be illegal.
  22. "Somebody think of the children" by Knutsi · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It's not encoureaging underage drinking, it's more of a sympthom of a society soaked in paranoia, unrealistic expectations and simplistic views of the world that clash with a modern age where a person's life and living will be more exposed and available.

    So we have two choices now: a.) remove the access to insight into our lives, or restrict it radically, or b.) realise that the people that take care of your children are humans too, with all that entails. There are no saints here. It's not a bad thing.

  23. Re:She was not denied her degree by swissfondue · · Score: 4, Informative
    To read about more than meets the eye: Check out this link to blogher.

    Excerpt: "However, school district solicitor Howard L. Kelin said Tuesday that criticism of the teachers contained in the lawsuit is unfair.

    Kelin disputes the allegations the teachers, Deann Buffington and Nicole Reinking, influenced the college to withhold the degree.

    Snyder was given a poor evaluation based on her performance while teaching at the high school and was warned not to direct students to her MySpace page, which contained the questionable photographs, Kelin said.

    Despite being warned to maintain a professional relationship with her students Kelin said, Snyder continued to direct students to her Web page.

    --
    Rubies and Pearls are not what you think.
  24. Re:She was not denied her degree by bkr1_2k · · Score: 4, Informative

    Actually someone else posted this elsewhere in the thread, but there is definitely more to it.

    http://bbsnews.net/article.php/20070502234811315

    Seems she'd been reprimanded as a student teacher several times and she knew she was in the wrong. It doesn't seem to be as cut and dried as the original article would have us believe. Also, the picture posted in the original article is different than the one in the above article. Two very different images that give completely different impressions of a "teacher" if seen by students.

    --
    "Growing old is inevitable; growing up is optional."
  25. Re:Only denied Teaching Degree by tbriggs6 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    You are exactly right. The Commonwealth of Pennsylvania placed high standards on our teachers, including requiring them to maintain a certain degree of virtue and decorum in their private lives. In fact, any teacher found committing even a misdemeanor even in a non-public forum can be stripped of their credentials at anytime. Further, the entire text of the article explained that there were some concerns raised by her practicum advisers. The implication being that she wasn't really up to par after all. So, while Millersville University took a harsh approach to this one candidate, I actually applaud their efforts. As little as 20 years ago in Pennsylvania and across the country, Universities maintained the right of "in loco parentis" (sp?). Now, Universities are petrified of ticking a student off and incurring the inevitable litigation. Maybe the pendulum will begin to swing back toward some serious ass-kicking on students. Professors are NOT there to baby sit. Professors do NOT have to "give A's" to everyone. Students are NOT entitled to a degree. Students who work full-time so they can afford a nice car, cheap booze, and loads of pot are going to have serious difficulty maintaining any academic standing. So, go MU, I think you sent a strong message to students. I just hope it doesn't go too far. P.S. Teachers aren't the only individuals expected to maintain social decorum - so are commonwealth employees.

  26. Re:She was not denied her degree by SomeoneGotMyNick · · Score: 4, Funny

    She was granted an English degree

    But what can you do with an English degree? It she doesn't teach, the only other thing she could probably do is open a Poem Repair shop.
  27. Digging a little deeper by Mortanius · · Score: 4, Interesting
    A little more digging turns up some of the finer points of the fight that aren't necessarily reported in the Washington Post article. For example, this article from the Sydney Morning Herald states:

    Snyder did her student-teaching at Conestoga Valley High School in 2006.

    Conestoga Valley officials told the college they would stop accepting student-teachers from Millersville if she went unpunished, the lawsuit said.

    Which leads one to believe that the university was being pressured from the district to do something about her and let them save face. Presumably the district feels they're in a position of enough power (taking on most of their students for their student teaching assignments?) that they could do this.

    However, if you look at the response from Conestoga Valley, available on their website here, they state that's untrue, and include some more information not linked in the Washington Post article, including what they claim is the offending Myspace blog post which is not the picture hosted by thesmokinggun.com which the WP article links to. It could be a little damning towards her if you believe the district that she was actively encouraging the kids to go to her Myspace page, but then, not knowing what her page is (I would imagine by now it's either been deleted or locked down anyway) it'd be hard to say whether the content therein is really unacceptable for the students to see.

    One quote from their response troubles me to some degree though, from her cooperating teacher, Nicole Reinking:

    One of the concerns that Ms. Snyder's cooperating teacher, Nicole Reinking, expressed to Ms. Snyder throughout the semester was the importance of maintaining a professional working relationship with the students and not to become overly familiar with them regarding her personal life.

    Certainly that can be taken any number of ways, some good, some bad, but taking it simply at face value, it saddens me to see where education has gone these days. Growing up in rural Maine (not that there's really any other kind of Maine :-P) we were all very friendly with our teachers, they would regularly invite our classes to their houses for cookouts and such, we didn't turn out so bad. But that's an entirely different discussion.

    Regardless, in the end I'm a little surprised and frightened that a university feels they have the ability to do this. That after someone has paid them tens of thousands of dollars for their education, and has presumably satisfactorily completed the academic requirements, they can one day before graduation tell you "Yeah, we're not going to give you the degree you wanted, have this English degree instead." What's to keep them from doing that to someone else because they don't like brunettes or people from Alaska? (Don't answer that, I know it's a stupid question. :-P) At the very least, if her performance in the field so to speak was the cause of their decision, say so. Naturally (as would be standard practice at any univeristy, I'd assume) the only mention of it on their website at the moment is a brief aside that they can't say anything publicly.
  28. Re:She was not denied her degree by Fujisawa+Sensei · · Score: 4, Insightful

    So she was reprimanded, did she get a passing grade? If yes, then give her the cert, if not deny her the cert. And just because she gets her cert doesn't mean they have to give her a recommendation or hire her.

    But if they pull that BS she should get enough money from the school system so she doesn't have to work, the people recall most of the school board and the superintendent is forced to resign. Its called you screwed somebody's life over, now you get to pay.

    --
    If someone is passing you on the right, you are an asshole for driving in the wrong lane.
  29. Re:umm - throwing the BS flag by elrous0 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Only abstinence eliminates the risk of STDs and pregnancy.

    No it doesn't. There is still a 0.001% chance of contracting an STD from a gynecologist visit, a 0.0012% chance of contracting genital warts from a toilet seat, a 0.0019% chance of becoming pregnant while being unconscious and raped during any given hospital stay, etc.

    The only SURE way to avoid STD's and pregnancy is a successful suicide. So I would like to encourage my right-wing religious friends to consider that as an option--if you TRULY want to remain pure, that is. It's the only way to be sure.

    --
    SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
  30. Not a straw man by Per+Abrahamsen · · Score: 5, Insightful

    > Isn't that what they call a straw man argument...

    Nope. It would be a straw man argument if he claimed these were the spoken arguments against birth control. But he doesn't, he speculate that these are the unspoken reasons (at least #1 and #2).

    It does show a total lack of respect for the opponents. Nothing wrong with that. The official spoken arguments for certain positions, such as alien visitors, creationism or the immorality of birth control are utterly insane. Trying to counter them with rational arguments are a total waste of time, as they are not based on rational thinking.

    It is much more productive to try to analyze which emotional needs makes people hold to these irrational positions. Once you understand the true reasoning behind them, you can start working on filling the emotional need the motivates them, and the positions become irrelevant.

    > You have put those with different opinions than you in a box, and then made up there thoughts so
    > you can be better than them... isn't that what your post was complaining about in the first
    > place?

    Nope, he was complaining about people trying to control others behavior. Not about people trying to change others opinions.

  31. Die of dehydration? by ukemike · · Score: 3, Interesting

    What's to say that this isn't water? Are teaching students supposed to swear off all liquids? Even assuming it is 120 proof grain alcohol, does that school have a rule against adult students drinking?

    I keep thinking that Rod Serling is going to step out from behind a door and say, "A quiet campus in a quiet town becomes the stage for tragedy when teetotalers go on a witch hunt, in the Twilight Zone."

    --
    -- QED
    1. Re:Die of dehydration? by Bloke+down+the+pub · · Score: 3, Insightful

      What's different is that the page (at least the photo I saw) shows nothing of the sort.

      --
      It's true I tell you, feller at work's next door neighbour read it in the paper.
    2. Re:Die of dehydration? by aztektum · · Score: 3, Insightful

      If you're referring to the article itself, this lady isn't even employed by a district. This is about her living her life and someone else trying to dictate a level of "professionalism" upon her. This is ridiculous and I hope she wins.

      --
      :: aztek ::
      No sig for you!!
  32. insight in the american psyche by N3wsByt3 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Your comment is truelly remarkable and gtives an idea of the completely screwed up mentality USa people have (at least, a part of it, and most likly the bible-belt part).

    In my country, nobody would give a rats' ass if a teacher DId say she/he got drunk the night before. What, you think pupils or students are going to get traumatised? Seems to be going on a lot of traumas, lately, including 'online rape'. For Gods' sake; when are you guys going to get a grip? Your problems mainly stem just *because* you treat youth as if they were some alien beings who can have no idea what's the real world all about. Of course, they DO know all to well, but because of the paniced reactions everywhere, they never have learned how to deal with it in a normal fashion.

    To be 21 before you can sip a glass of alcohol...meh; ridiculous. In most european countries, you can drink alcohol when you're 16. and when your parents let see sip from their beers, even when you're only nine, no-one makes any fuss about it - because it isn't. the rerality is, if ypou treat drinking beer as no big deal, and you let them taste it, they usually go: "yukkie, that's awful." and don't want to try it out anymore. Also, when you drink with kids in a social context (e.g. not binge drinking stuff), they are more inclined to follow that pattern. If you treat it as something special, it gets 'forbidden fruit' status, and if they only have peers to look how to act when confronted with alcohol, that's when shit happens.

    In france, kids often drink 'table-wine' (wine with moderate alcohol-level) as a normal thing, in Belgium the same with table-beer, etc. do they have more drunks and alcohol-problems there, then in the USA with its 21-year law? Not at all. In fact, the prevalence of problematic drinking (like binge-drinking) is way LOWER there than in anglo-saxon countries, where the restriction to alcohol is much more severe. The whole concept of 'save the children' in the USA has gone way overboard, to the detriment of the youths themselves.

    In a reasonable country, the fact that a teacher was drunk has nothing to do with her professionalism *unless* she was drunk during the course of her work, obviously. But if she got drunk outside her professional hours, even if she puts hundreds of photos about it on the net, it doesn't say anything about her capacities as a teacher. It's the same crap and obsession of the USA with irrelevant nonsense as back with Clinton getting a blowjob, over and over again. What you do in your private life - EVEN if it comes out in the open (as long as it's legal) - DOES NOT and SHOULD NOT have any bearings on how you are treated while exercising your profession.

    In the USA, I wonder if a teacher can say something which is scientifically true but socially/politically-incorrect, like stating that moderate consumption of alcohol is actually healthy. These days, especially in the bible-belt states, I think no teacher can say that without risk of being fired or being severly reprimanded. Please correct me if I'm wrong in this. That obsession of weeding out the political incorrect and having to 'cry wolf' with all the other wolves (the prevailing mentality) is sickening.

    In summary:

    1)Drinking is no big deal
    2)Posting pics about it is no big deal

    Conclusion: as long as whatever she does is not illegal and does not affect her actual professionalism in the classroom, there is no reason why she should be treated the way she was. And even if it was illegal and did affect her teachings, then still it should be determined if it was severe enough to warrant the withdrawal of her diploma.

    --
    --- "To pee or not to pee, that is the question." ---
    1. Re:insight in the american psyche by multipartmixed · · Score: 4, Interesting

      > In the USA, I wonder if a teacher can say something which is scientifically true
        > but socially/politically-incorrect, like stating that moderate consumption of alcohol
        > is actually healthy.

      In certain parts of the USA, teachers may not even teach the theory of evolution, or that the earth is more than 6,000 years old!

      --

      Do daemons dream of electric sleep()?
  33. "Condoning" by mengel · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Giving someone a vaccine against a virus is not "condoning" anything.
    • Wearing a seatbelt is not "condoning" unsafe driving.
    • Putting up a lightning rod is not "condoning" thunderstorms.
    Anyone who uses that reasoning is seriously confused.

    Similarly, teaching kids about how their reproductive system works, and about contraception, is not "condoning" promiscuity, any more than teaching someone about locks, safes, and keys is "condoning" thievery.

    Certainly, promiscuity provides a disease vector, both for diseases we know about, and ones we don't yet.

    So does sneezing.

    Humans appear to have a limited ability to resist either of these urges. So for one we have condoms, and for the other, Kleenex(tm) (or your elbow).

    Do these same people argue that we shouldn't have tissues, because you should instead fight the urge to sneeze?

    --
    - "History shows again and again how nature points out the folly of men" -- Blue Oyster Cult, 'Godzilla'
  34. WHERE ARE THE MODERATORS by mstahl · · Score: 3, Insightful

    This comment is way way way way way off-topic. Seriously now. We're talking about underage drinking, freedom of expression, and puritanical outlooks on life that make no damn sense.

    Who is out there modding this insightful? Come over here. You're 'bout to get stabbed in the jaw.