Student Given Detention For Using Firefox [UPDATED]
An anonymous reader writes "Several sites are reporting that a student has been given detention for using Firefox to do his classwork. No, really. The student was in class, working on an assignment that necessitated using a browser. The teacher instructed him to stop using Firefox and to do his classwork, to which the student responded that he was doing his classwork using a 'better' browser (it is unclear whether the computer was the student's own computer or not). The clueless teacher (who called the rogue program 'Firefox.exe') ordered him to detention." Update: 12/17 20:09 by SM One of the school officials was nice enough to contact us and let us know this is a hoax. If you are planning on calling the school please refrain from doing so, I'm sure they have had enough excitement for one day.
It appears the infraction was probably closer to being for disobeying the teacher than for using Firefox. While it exposes an interesting deficiency in the general knowledge of educators about browser technology, it isn't necessarily their specialty. (We don't know if this was some proxy of a teacher who was unaware of options for browsers.)
Without any more information, this is merely a potential story... I wouldn't bother sending e-mails to the school. You may want to consider first:
Our schools are supposed to teach discipline, which most people think means following the rules. As Stephen Colbert says, if the rules were logical then they wouldn't be learning respect for the rules, they'd be learning logic.
I have seen the future, and it is inconvenient.
Headline is a bit sensationalist.
While Firefox is indeed a great browser, it is a largely irrelevant part of this sage -- kid runs unauthorized application, is told not to, disobeys instructions and talks back.
Boring.
Sidenote - Do the editors or the submitter start off the tags these days? This story came fresh with 4 tags...I thought it waited until "democracy" spoke. Wisdom of the masses et al.
Having worked in education for many years (and having kids), I guarantee that the student's side omits mention of defiance or cockiness. This of course doesn't excuse the idiot teacher, but I imagine there is more to it than presented by the submittor. It is astounding how innocent and respectful they believe they were after the fact. I imagine the kid wanted to use a better browser, the teacher got miffed at the install, and they both proceeded to behave poorly. Most likely the browser was just a catalyst in the childish behavior of both. And I say this strictly as having been the idiot teacher.
meh
I'm sure the student sat the teacher down and explained the pros and cons of Firefox vs IE in a clear and respectful manner, and didn't say "Shut up, hehe, I'm using Firefox. It's better than your crappy IE!"
If you are a jerk to a teacher, you get detention. I knew this when I was in school. When has it failed to be common knowledge?
I'd also like to know if the computer was the student's own or a school one. If it's a school computer, then all bets are off. If it's the student's, I would have said that I don't have IE.
Pulp Audio Weekly - Geek News and Reviews
The detention was for arguing with the teacher, I'm sure. We all know the school would be better off running Firefox as a matter of course; it would at the least be more secure. But the teacher should be able to, for instance, say "Stop using Word. I want this done in notepad."
It would be stupid, but the teacher can set the parameters of how the kids perform the work.
If the kid wants to promote Firefox, good for him. I'm sure he's sharper than the teacher. But the proper way is to write something up that lists the cost/security benefits and give it to somebody official, not just install and run the software.
(I'm assuming this was the school's machine, not his own computer.)
This is what I hear when I read this:
Teacher doesn't know all things about all things, makes request for perfectly reasonable action from child under his/her supervision. Child refuses on the grounds that child knows better than the teacher what the teacher was asking the child to do. Teacher gives child detention for disobedience.
Look, it turns out that teachers are not omniscient. Whether or not the child was correct that he was adhering to the spirit of the request, he was not adhering to the letter of the request, and refusing to do so is still worthwhile grounds for punishment.
Notably lacking from the report is what the kid's attitude was. If the kid copped an attitude, then nothing else would really matter. Also lacking is whether the student installed unauthorized software on the school's hardware. It could be the teacher was cutting the kid a break for a more serious offense by only giving him detention for failure to comply with the request.
There's many unknowns here, and giving the benefit of the doubt, it still breaks down to a student refusing to comply with a reasonable request, and that should be grounds for punishment.
Slay a dragon... over lunch!
Considering the teacher reported it as ".exe" that leads me to believe there was some sort of process monitoring going on, and the teacher saw that this one computer, presumably in a lab (else how could they monitor a personal laptop) which leads me to believe that the student DID install Firefox on school property and therefore broke the rules and should be punished.
Any chance that I would be outraged by this, which was quite low to begin with, has faded.
Pulp Audio Weekly - Geek News and Reviews
The teacher was right.
Well, the teacher was right... and wrong.
First, the teacher was wrong for not knowing what FireFox (FoxFire) is. Any teacher with a computer in the classroom should have AT LEAST that level of knowledge.
Second, the teacher was right in assigning detention. The teacher is in charge and has the right to tell the students what they can and can't run on school computers. If a student is running an application and the teacher tells the student to close it, the student needs to close it, period, end of story. It's no different in the real world. If an IT director tells you shut down Cain&Able, you can get fired if you don't. It doesn't matter that the IT director doesn't know what Cain&Able is.
There is no "I disagree" mod for a reason. Flamebait, Troll, and Overrated are not substitutes.
I work in School District IT, and can assure you that teachers decide what is in the classrooms, not IT. If the Teachers want something, IT is charged with making it happen.
However, teachers aren't absolute in their dictations, as IT is able to make recommendations, and express concerns (support, helpdesk resposibility etc) .
Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
Another day, another non-story.
This is no different than a company telling an employee what software to use on the company's time and company's equipment, and then the employee gets punished for disobeying. If the kid wanted to use something else, he should have done it on his own time and his own computer. "Freedom" doesn't have a damned thing to do with it. There is no story, the teacher is not even the least bit ignorant, stupid, or in the wrong, and I have absolutely zero sympathy for the kid.
And the Slashdot editor(s) responsible for the posting of this sensationalized non-story should also get detention.
I want a new quote. One that won't spill. One that don't cost too much. Or come in a pill.
What IT people? Maybe a University has an IT person, but most K-12 institutions in the U.S. have no dedicated IT person. Usually the "IT person" is just a teacher very knowledgeable about computers -- and is usually one of the teachers teaching computer programming classes. There's usually not a lot of formal IT policies, either. But I do know one thing -- the teacher, as a member of the faculty, is a representative of the school. If it was indeed a school-owned computer, the teacher has every right to order the student to run this or that or not run this or that on the school computer.
And the TFA is unclear about whether this was a student-owned computer or a school computer.
My blog
Anybody with half a brain will tell you that discipline is critical for kids when they're growing up, and here you are telling people to harrass a teacher who dared to punish a disobedient student.
Absolutely pathetic.
"It does not do to leave a live dragon out of your calculations, if you live near him." - Tolkien
The kid wasn't ordered to shoot himself in the foot. He was told not to use an un-approved program.
Cut the hyperbole. Your example doesn't apply.
He wasn't being told to do something illegal. He wasn't be told to do something that could cause physical harm to someone. The teacher was in charge, and if he wouldn't stop he deserved what he got. The correct thing to do would be to stop and then talk to someone more powerful (like the principal) about getting that policy changed.
Comment forecast: Bits of genius surrounded by a sea of mediocrity.
If Firefox was installed on the school computers , then i see no reason not to use it .
Unless the teachers is completely blind , he can see the web page the student is looking at , and can judge from that wether or not he is doing his work .
This is like a teacher telling you to copy every file in a folder , and because he only knows how to do that by right click-copy-paste , you get detention for using Ctrl-A - Ctrl-C - Ctrl-V .
It's a silly example , but it's just the same .
Slipping shoelaces ?
Debating idiocity lends some validity to said idiocity.
Indeed. It appears that the teacher here is the victim.
Even before seeing this statement from the school district, I believed this to be the case, due to most of the language being in correct English, apart from a few words and phrases with grammatical errors -- and those being the ones describing the teacher's assessment and actions.
If this being a fraud is indeed the case, I expect that the person who altered the detention letter gets expelled permanently, or, if not a student, charged with fraud and impersonation.
"All I did was link to publicly available information. I didn't do anything further with it myself, what others did with it is up to them. If anyone really did abuse it (and I doubt that they did; any looneys would have looked up the info themselves) they will have to live with the consequences, not me." -VJ42
What you did (despite the lame attempt to cast aside responsibility) is to pretend that you aren't aware of 1) the large percentage of people that will skim across this forum and NOT realize that this teacher does not need thousands of hate-letters, 2) that many readers will not care that despite their mob-mentality -- their chastisement of the teacher would not have changed his/her behavior if he/she HAD done something wrong, and that 3) our legal system has fully vetted the "I didn't kill they guy I just left a bunch of guns around his little brother's room and what the kid does with them is his fault, not mine." -- and found it lacking in sound logic.
You are showing a method of rationalizing a witch trial that you believe in burning someone for, but can't support with your own logic -- so you hope others will anonymously carry out the sentence for you.
Shame on you. Whatever your political strip, civilized society does not value anarchy without reason. When there is a punishment without a crime, the punishment becomes the crime, and the leader of the torch-bearing mob the criminal.
You have branded yourself -- so don't get all upset that some readers here have pointed you out.
Just another veteran of the platform wars. It's a great time to be a fan of tech.