Slashdot Mirror
Missouri Law Says Students, Teachers Can't Be Facebook Friends
An anonymous reader writes "Teachers can be friendly with their students, but they can't be their friends, at least when it comes to social networks such as Facebook. State Governor Jay Nixon has signed Senate Bill 54, which goes into effect on August 28, 2011 in the state of Missouri. In other words, later this month it will be illegal for students and teachers to be friends online."
Wow, that place has changed a lot since I was there. Back in my day, we didn't even have clothes. Just ran around naked and illiterate all day.
SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
Obviously it's more appropriate to have inappropriate sexual advances made in person rather than while you're safely miles from the teacher, under parental protection/supervision.
which is totally what she said
Too much crap, from favoritism to improper relationships, could originate between teachers and students on facebook.
Senate Bill 54 is dubbed the Amy Hestir Student Protection Act. It is named after a Missouri public school student who was repeatedly molested by a teacher several decades ago.
Several decades ago? Yeah, definitely Facebook's fault! Let's make a law!
This is already policy in a lot of school districts, simply because there are too many potential problems that could arise between students and teachers becoming too "friendly." Even where it's not policy, I can't imagine why any teacher in their right mind would accept the risk of "friending" students online. I think it ought to remain a district-level thing, though.
Thanks to the War on Drugs, it's easier to buy meth than it is to buy cold medicine!
And kind of creepy as well. I would be perfectly comfortable with a teacher being fired for friending his students on facebook. I don't think it should rise to the level of criminality in and of itself though, and criminalizing the act itself is of questionable legality.
[quote]It is named after a Missouri public school student who was repeatedly molested by a teacher several decades ago. [/quote] I'm guessing the law is more encompassing than just Facebook friends, it probably aims to prevent students and teachers from becoming friends at all. Otherwise the name of the law would be rather odd given that I don't think any students and teachers were hooking up via Facebook several decades ago.
I read the internet for the articles.
My old math teacher used to post help on homework on facebook, looks likes that's gone.
My husband (prof) routinely turns down any students that try to friend him on Facebook. Heck, he's paranoid about having anyone at his school friend him, including his fellow professors. I've also got a similar policy for work - NONE of my current coworkers are on my FB, only ones from previous jobs. It's sad they felt the need to legislate common sense.
Occasionally living proof of the Ballmer peak.
At least Missouri lawmakers are thinking of the children. /sarcasm
In reality, it appears as though Missouri lawmakers are not thinking at all.
This post comes with a double-your-money-back guarantee!
Any offense taken to this post is at your sole discretion.
Probably a good idea for teachers to have a bit of professional distance and not friend their pupils/students through social media, but is it really necessary to have a law against it?
Unfortunately legislatures continue to legislate against teachers, and this will continue to not stop problems. Every year we hear about a teacher or two that gets caught up in allegations, but I guarantee you making it illegal to 'friend' students on Facebook will not stop it. I don't see it in the summary, but I heard yesterday that this law will also apply to former students. That's a shame given how many former students that I am able to keep in touch with after they graduate!
Nanny state bullshit.
Friends, when it comes to the safety of children, no measure is too severe. The fact is, a disturbing proportion of teachers are Italian or display troubling Italian influences. Do you really want your son or daughter to be stewing in the cultural, multimedia influence of the Italian islamocommunist menace 24/7? Kids and Italians, and suspected Italians (I would conservatively estimate that 75% of teachers fall into this category) should be rigorously segregated from one another on the internet, for the common good.
Teachers exist to drill our nation's students to be good soldiers and workers for America, not to recruit them with Italian propaganda to become homosexual islamocommunist sex-cadres for Italy! --underground commando of the Campaign For A Free Internet
I'm scandalized. Thank God the Government stepped in to control this type of fraternizing with students! But it doesn't make sense, they can still be friends "offline"??? Should the Government allow that? It really should be studied. What about being friendly outside of school -- sounds questionable. Could be risky.....
that a Democrat would think that this would solve anything.
Just in missouri it appears there must be a lack of common sense which is why they need a law for it.
Electronic Music Made Using Linux http://soundcloud.com/polyp
What happens if your teacher is your parent?
Rhymes that keep their secrets will unfold behind the clouds.There upon the rainbow is the answer to a neverending story
Another freedom goes down the drain. This is something truly fascist. An obvious way of controlling the masses all in the interest of the safety of the children. Ultimate effect, children becoming wards of the state.
Without exception. Why else would they want to spend their days in the company of young children? I'm glad Missouri has the political courage to think of the children. I hope they also cut those cadillac pensions teachers always receive. Lousy freeloaders. Did they expect our thanks and admiration for trying to teach our kids?
Teachers cannot establish, maintain, or use a work-related website unless it is available to school administrators and the child’s legal custodian, physical custodian, or legal guardian.
No online attendance system or grading system unless the parents have access? Weird. By attendance system I don't mean the kids attendance, but the teachers attendance (sick days, medical leave, etc). Weird.
Teachers also cannot have a nonwork-related website that allows exclusive access with a current or former student.
For education major K-12 teachers this makes sense, err, sorta. Does this apply to the independent contractor/consultants hired to teach my CS college level courses? What is the liability if a teacher quits, goes into private industry, and unknowingly friends a coworker who was a student decades ago (last name changed due to marriage, etc)?
"Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings." - Victor Stenger
Facebook should've just called them "contacts", because that's what they are.
Now how do we clear up this misunderstanding?
I'd say if you're in Missouri, you should get the hell out while you still can.
Part of the Second American Revolution!
But if both are adult, it might rise up some question about noting the student, but I don't see anything inappropriate between an adult student having a relationship (friendely/sexual/romantic) with an adult teacher.
Teachers and students should be the ones to make this decision not the state.
And if the students happen to be minors the parents should be monitoring their child's Facebook usage, again not the State.
I'm not sure what this moronic governor thinks, but the government is not a replacement for parenting.
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
How in the world does a law forbidding teachers from being friends with students meet that criteria?
I see everyone is in agreement with this.
It's a shame. When I was a teenager I was friends with one of my teachers. He took me under his wing, brought me to cool places that I wouldn't have been exposed to otherwise. He became friends with my family. Never an inappropriate touch or word.
But everyone knows now that all men are child molesters, especially teachers.
- For the complete works of Shakespeare: cat
Every teacher I know has their own facebook policy. I really think this is best.
Most teachers that I know have separate facebook accounts. One is for being friends with the students, and one is personal. I know one person that even uses facebook to discuss assignments during off-work hours. It's an easy way for her to make sure that the students see what she posts.
I can't figure out why a law would be needed here.
Free unix account: freeshell.org
http://www.senate.mo.gov/11info/pdf-jrnl/DAY48.pdf#page=8
Sorry about that, same result though.
I haven't read the entire Bill, but I'm not sure I agree with the article's interpretation of it. The section that the article writer has a problem with says this:
Teachers cannot establish, maintain, or use a work-related website unless it is available to school administrators and the child's legal custodian, physical custodian, or legal guardian. Teachers also cannot have a nonwork-related website that allows exclusive access with a current or former student.
The article writer is concerned about the second sentence, stating that "(i)t’s the actual friending, messaging, and whatever other direct connection you can make on a social network that will not be allowed". However, the second sentence really doesn't say that. In fact, the start of the paragraph, which the article writer skipped over, states:
By January 1, 2012, every school district must develop a written policy concerning teacher-student communication and employee-student communications. Each policy must include appropriate oral and nonverbal personal communication, which may be combined with sexual harassment policies, and appropriate use of electronic media as described in the act, including social networking sites.
So really, the law is just stating that schools are required to define, in writing, exactly how students can and cannot communicate using various means, including social networking sites. In other words, the law is not banning anything, but merely forcing the schools to establish and communicate their own rules.
"You cannot simultaneously prevent and prepare for war." -- Albert Einstein
Have their relationships be on G+ instead?
TFA is not clear if this bans college professors and stud nets from being friends on Facebook et al. There are no high school teachers I am still in contact with, but I do have a few college professors as Facebook friends. And no waiting until after the class either, the law bans friending current and former students.
Senate Bill 54 is dubbed the Amy Hestir Student Protection Act, which aims to fight inappropriate contact between students and teachers, including protecting children from sexual misconduct by their educators. It is named after a Missouri public school student who was repeatedly molested by a teacher several decades ago.
Not only no friending on Facebook, BTW. It doesn't allow "social networking" contact through any means (i.e. IMing), although it does seem to have an exception for work-related websites (i.e. school-monitored), and it only seems to include networking websites (which is odd). What, exactly, is this law supposed to achieve? No teacher looking to molest a kid is going to care if they are breaking this law, and it's easy enough to avoid being caught. And teachers, who have close contact with their students every day, don't need social networks to communicate. The whole thing looks like a "look! We're doing something to protect your kids! Vote for us!" Someone should point out how most students also have small, portable, real time voice communication devices called "cell phones". Oh, and texting. Don't believe that does anything about that either. Oh! Almost forgot "email" (The language specifically mentions "website"). In fact, it looks like it only impedes students and teachers who are actually, you know, friends. Which can and does happen.
"None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license." --John Milton
I wonder what they'll do for say, home schooled kids, or kids who happen to have parents of relatives who are teachers? I know that most kids aren't super thrilled about having to friend their parents, but will they make it actually illegal in those cases?
I tend to form close relationships to the nerdy students in the school, and I tend to have more in common with them then the other teachers I work with. I also politely inform each student that tries to friend me on Facebook that I won't friend them until graduation, since I use my Facebook for personal rather then profession purposes. Once they graduate I have no problem friending them if they approach me again.
WTF!?!?! Can someone explain to me why someone even bothered posting this?
Why does this remind me of the bit in 'Joe Dirt' where he mistakes a poop tank for a bomb and straps himself to it.
Can they still poke each other even if they're not friends?
Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
You can legislate the process, or you can legislate the outcome. But you can't do both. The problem is, most of our Congress critters write school legislation the same way they write the tax code. It doesn't work that way. When you mandate the state curriculum and direct teachers to spent their classroom time in specific ways, you remove their ability to use their own judgement and skills in a field that desperately requires that level of micromanagement.
So, in our fear of the unquantifiable, we've removed yet another useful new tool for teachers to reach out and connect with their students. We've now legislated the process, and we're stuck with whatever (bad) outcome we end up with.
Back when I was in college, I aspired to be a high school teacher (writing software was a temp gig). Today I wouldn't dream of going into teaching having seen the clusterf*** NCLB has made of it.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
How does this work when the teacher/principal is a parent/grand parent of the student?
ayottesoftware.com
And kind of creepy as well. I would be perfectly comfortable with a teacher being fired for friending his students on facebook.
Unbelievable. So, teachers are all potential pedophiles, eh?
In this day and age finding decent role models is near impossible. Politicians are all lying scumbags. Business leaders are cheating sons of bitches. Scientists are spineless cowards. And entertainers are just garbage.
There were actually a few teachers in my day who actually took the depressed, shy, abused, and withdrawn child that I was and inspired me to try to do better. Some of them were able to pull talents out of me that I didn't realize that I possessed. If I had more contact with them - on a professional and even friend level - I think that my life would be much much better.
Looking back from my middle aged wisdom, I can see teachers who were enthusiastic about teaching and their subjects - they loved children. The thought of them molesting or doing anything to harm a child (0-18 years old) doesn't even cross my mind.
I have known sleazy people who preyed on children - they did it in private and they were slick about it - they would never do it on Facebook - to great of a chance of being caught.
... have anything better to do, like dealing with unemployment, budget deficits, the environment ??? I mean really ?
Seriously tho, some teachers use FB to help students with their homework and such. One kid asks a question that many others in the class may have. When the teacher answers it, many students can benefit.
Not sure why we need a law for this, but as someone who teaches at a (private) Missouri university, this just seems like common sense to me. There is very little to gain from being friends (online or otherwise) with your students while they are in your class, and it can cause many headaches (appearance of favoritism, abuse of power, etc.). Generally it is wisest to wait until after the class is over to have any sort of non-work relationship with your students.
(Posting AC because I'm at work and I don't log in while at work...)
Rather than make it illegal for teachers to be friends with students how about you just make it illegal for teachers to have illegal relations with someone under-age. Simple.
What comes next? Making it illegal for a teacher and student to walk on the same side of the street? Yeah, I know that sounds stupid but it's also stupid for it to be illegal for a teacher and student to be friends. I think we can all think of many examples of students pretty much being saved because of the kindness and friendship shown them by a teacher they like and respect. Take that away and a large number of students will end up feeling more alone than they already do.
In other words, won't someone think of the children?
Hey, if "they" can use that to defend their stance, we can use it to defend ours.
Let's see, public school teachers (I was one for 5 years) are expected to spend 50-70 hours a week perfecting their craft and spend 'extra time' tutoring/helping/counseling students. On the plus side, I'm sure thousands of students over the years have been helped by a caring and nurturing teacher; I'm not sure I would've survived high school if it wasn't for a caring English teacher.
However, is it any wonder that teachers feel that the only human contact they get is the children they serve? And when a group of students drag you into their 'drama' (and it happens quite often), it is easy to lose site of your real goal, which is to teach a subject.
Facebook (and other social media, including texts) is just another vehicle to be abused by the side effect of 50+ hours a week with students. Would you, as a teacher, give a student and his/her friends a ride home in the rain? How about some $ for lunch? Advice? What if they call you at home? Of course, there are proper responses to these questions, but the lines get blurred very quickly.
The Missouri law is just a response to this. Popular teachers are often the ones that blur the lines of professional separation. And, in a professional sense, a teacher is often criticized if they are not 'effective'--and popularity is often a side effect of this.
Common sense says a teacher shouldn't friend a student. Professional sense says you should be available to your students. Legal sense says you should steer clear (as I often did). But after 50+ hours a week with teenagers, what time/energy do you have for other nurturing human contact (and often teenagers are very nurturing, sometimes for the wrong reasons admittedly). AND, in many states, getting caught (by photograph but often by a parent) at a bar/party/unpopular political event (including religious) will cost you a fine, a reprimand, your job, and even your license. I like live music--do you know how many times I and my teacher friends had to make sure the club/bar owned did NOT take our pictures for his popularity wall? So where else does a teacher go for 'real world' contact?
(flame shield on)--Obviously, there are things teachers should/could do to get positive relationships. BUT, we are talking about people who, in a general sense, are like you and I: We know what we should do but get away with blurring the lines because we are too tired/angry/desperate to 'follow the rules'-- (flame shield off).
I'm upset that none of the hot female teachers when I was growing up wanted to leave their husbands and bang me during and after my junior high classes.
Ave Molech Setting
When is Missouri going to ban priests talking to underaged kiddies? I see more chance of 'sexual misconduct' happening in Sunday schools than on FB.
I'm Not Antisocial, I'm Just Not User Friendly
This law basically says that teachers aren't mature enough to take care of themselves and use their good judgment as adults. Maybe some can't, but compared to other groups of humans (like, for example, still-maturing teenage students) they are much better at doing so. There will always be "edge cases" with every human grouping. Get over it, legislature. Welcome to humanity.
The more you know, the more you have to say and the more you should listen.
Too much crap, from favoritism to improper relationships, could originate between teachers and students on facebook.
A cardinal rule in any book of leadership is that the leader and the men aren't buddies. They can be friend-ly, but not friends. In the military it's called fraternizing, and is strictly verboten. It's a pretty good, time tested rule. There's a big difference between being one of the guys and being their leader. And teaching is a form of leadership. It's not exactly like other authority/subordinate roles, but there are indeed clear lines that should be drawn. It is undoubtedly harder to be an effective teacher if you're one of the kids. There has to be the requisite respect for superior authority there (and a teacher, by definition, is an authority on on the knowledge being taught).
I don't question the policy so much as how it's being enacted. A state law? Simply making it state education department policy should be sufficient.
Life is hard, and the world is cruel
I think there are some serious first Amendment issues here. First of all does Freedom of assembly include assembling online? If so then this is clearly a violation of the Teachers and the Students rights.
Looked at another way Friend[ing] someone on Facebook is a public statement. Facebook does not have to let you friend anyone they don't want you to, its there service. I suppose the teacher is the state's employee but outside of being able to regulate comments about the schools and the education system, where does the state obtain any authority to limit the teacher's speech? I can't even imagine a legitimate argument to restrict the students right to express friendship with their teacher outside of school.
Where is the ACLU when you actually need them?
Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
My son has several of his HS teachers as friends.
A) I'm personally acquainted with his teachers
B) They're interested in my son as an individual, not as a subject
C) They care about his views and attitudes, as it affects his class performance
Laws are not a good replacement for parents who are not involved in their children's lives and educations.
If you don't have the time or interest, you shouldn't be having children.
So does that mean that kids whose parents are teachers in Missouri now have legal recourse to avoid embarassing posts on their facebook walls? We all should be so lucky...
My sister teaches 6 yo, a friend 12-15. Both have received (understated) guidelines that they "shouldn't" use Facebook for anything work-related.
I can understand how having an open means of communication with students, and publishing content with shaky confidentiality, can be a sensitive subject. But the rule does seem a little ass-backwards: other social services are not discouraged, and more specific guidelines (make your groups invite-only, all your content confidential, make clear that "classroom behavior rules" apply...) are not even mentioned.
In the end, sis and mate end up doing all the wrong things (publishing photos of kids to a much wider audience than they realize, getting trolled...) for marginal results, as a lot of kids and even parents only know Facebook and won't register with / visit regularly another site.
I don't know how flexible Facebook can be, but I'm sure an outfit as big as an education ministry could wrangle special conditions and a simplified, secure interface, for a few hundreds of thousands of users.
The Cloud - because you don't care if your apps and data are up in the air.
She has won several Teacher of the Year awards in multiple states etc and her students regularly rank higher than their peers in standardized testing.
While I avoid facebook like the plague, she's an avid friender and most of her facebook friends are current and former students. We are both centrists leaning a little left.
If *parents/guardians* are concerned then it should be up to them to bring it to the local school district and if the school board feels it's worth addressing then do so with a policy, but legislating this at the state/federal level is assinine.
(albeit, local politics are even more slippery than state/federal)
We're both centrists that lean left but government has no business in these realms.
Poor constitution, how I loved thee...
Lets just ban adults (parents included) from talking to children entirely. Every adult is a pedophile and cannot be trusted to form any sort of social connection with a child. This is a pretty dumb law, I could see cases where students may want to be friends with teachers via social networks. It could be a really good way to organize extra curricular activities/clubs.
Teachers also cannot have a nonwork-related website that allows exclusive access with a current or former student. Former student is defined as any person who was at one time a student at the school at which the teacher is employed and who is eighteen years of age or less and who has not graduated.
So if you are a teacher at a school that your child has ever attended you can't be use such websites with your own child?
A young teacher who happens to teach at the school their younger sibling attends/attended?
If I have a gmail account and somebody else has a gmail account, I can send them an email, does that trigger "exclusive access"?
Teachers cannot establish, maintain, or use a work-related website unless it is available to school administrators and the child’s legal custodian, physical custodian, or legal guardian.
Hope no school uses a web based system for storing exam questions, or leave requests, or pay stubs, or disciplinary action tracking, or managing software licenses, or whatever...
Reminds me of a story from long ago now when the Department of Education (https://www.det.nsw.edu.au/) added a policy that required school Principals to report suspected sexual relationships to the department (regardless of the validity of the suspicions - they basically wanted to centralize the data) which was worded to include all students in the department not just students at the Principal's school. So one Principal had to report himself, because his wife enrolled in a TAFE class, making her a student according to the stupid policy
I am a high-school chemistry teacher and I use Facebook as one of my teaching tools. Before an exam I create a Facebook group which is an online study group. People can ask questions, post pictures of notes, chemical equations, or molecular diagrams. Sometimes a student will answser a question, sometimes I will answer it or offer a hint. To participate students need to be part of the group and hence have to be my Facebook Friend.
The law is seeking to prevent students and teachers from having an extra-curricular interpersonal relationship of the friendly sort. But instead it is outlawing having a connection through a social networking business which happens to call its associations Friends.
I wonder if this would have been avoided had Facebook called them something different, like Linkees. Or, going the other direction, and keeping with Facebook's original intent, calling them Hook-ups.
I guess this is just one more reason to avoid living in a state run by dull-eyed mouth-breathers.
In fact, most educated educators view social media as a massive lawsuit trap. If they have Facebook accounts, they're locked down.
I only *just* started a Facebook account so that I could communicate with an help organize a hobby group. None of my current or former students know about it. And it will stay that way.
Not all networks operate on "Friending". What about forums? Are school services exempt? What about email contact lists? Ok, then what about GTalk lists if the teacher and the student use Gmail?
From the bill: "Teachers also cannot have a nonwork-related website that allows exclusive access with a current or former student."
So, if I lived in Missouri, being over 30 years old, I can't talk to my 2nd grade teacher? And what the hell is "exclusive access"? If that means private messaging, that includes, what 99.999999999... fuck it, 100% of all internet services.
Why don't we just criminalize teachers having computers? On second thought, why doesn't Missouri criminalize Missourians having computers? And while we're at it, let's criminalize teachers talking to students without at least 2 adults present so that there is never this "exclusive access".
This completely and utterly fails the smell test, and will be overturned promptly by any court. I have no doubt some student/parent/teacher in a political science class will turn the damn law into a class project with the teacher taking it to court by flaunting the law by friending the entire class.
I8-D
"Your teachers are dangerous and should be feared. You take big risks every time you interact with them." This is the message being sent to school children. One wonders why the government employs a bunch of psychopathic sexual deviants in our school systems.
Seriously, Google+ allows far better control of who sees what. I am walking away from facebook in part because of this reason.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
$10 says this law doesn't trump the freedom of Association that enshrined in the US Constitution. It will fall with the first challenge.
https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Freedom_of_association#United_States_Constitution
There is a war going on for your mind.
I have a friend who is an English teacher. Starting back in the MySpace days she would take her students' postings and use them as examples. She used it for everything: contractions, spelling, punctuation, run-ons, fragments, etc. It's quite the treasure trove of errors. She would keep it anonymous; I don't even think she told the students where she got the material. But for those students she took material from, it was a real eye-opener about online speech and accountability. Bear in mind, most of her students were 12, so they weren't even supposed to be on MySpace.
I imagine there are teachers in Missouri with similar tactics, but I guess there are plenty of other ways to get material.
As a side note: WTF? Former students can't be friends either? I keep contact with several former teachers.
WTF!?!?! Can someone explain to me why someone even bothered posting this?
I'm only guessing, so bear with me, but I surmise:
* The poster is from Missouri
* The poster's only Facebook friends were his teachers
* The poster doesn't have any wall to post this on except his own, which isn't being seen by anyone else due to the first two points.
* Asshattery isn't a crime.
I sure hope the text of the law is clearer on this, but sounds like once you've been a student, you can never talk to your teachers one-on-one, even after you've grown up and become a teacher at the same school.
What do you mean they cut the power? How can they cut the power, man? They're animals!
Ever teach in a small town? You basically know everyone from the tiniest tot to the most elderly elder. In that case, it's quite easy to be a family friend and maybe you would and maybe you wouldn't "friend" their child (a potential student) on a social networking site. That would be illegal because it's an exclusive non-work related website. Give me a break.
There are professional boundaries in teaching, and they have to be fairly well maintained because you are working with other people's children. But sometimes things go too far. Just as you shouldn't let your social life interfere with teaching, teaching shouldn't interfere with your social life.
The Missouri state government has determined that many crimes happen outdoors, and has passed a bill making it illegal for people to go outside.
teachers and others not really your friends go on the "list1" group and your real friends go on the real-friends list
HOW DAMN simple is that
If I were a teacher I wouldn't want all of my students (past and present) to be friended on my personal FB page anyway. Even if it were segregated into groups (fb) or circles (G+), it would just be a lot easier to manage posting information and fielding questions, messages, and such if a page were made for the classroom that was organized by the teacher. I wouldn't see it as a function of things being appropriate conduct or not, just a sane separation between work and personal communication.
Teachers cannot establish, maintain, or use a work-related website unless it is available to school administrators and the child’s legal custodian, physical custodian, or legal guardian. Teachers also cannot have a nonwork-related website that allows exclusive access with a current or former student.
I can at least see what they are going for with not allowing students and teachers to be friends (I think it is dumb, but I can see it). But FORMER students??? So in Missouri, I can't legally be friends with anyone who has ever been my teacher, ever. I can be 40 and the former teacher 75, and legally we are not able to be friends on Facebook? That has to be one of the silliest things I have ever read.
"Information wants to be expensive" - Stewart Brand, the same guy who said "Information wants to be free"
People should not be allowed to friend their boss, their political representatives, their employees, their landlord, their doctor, or anyone they have any actual contact with. Online friendship should be reserved for people you've never actually met in person and have absolutely nothing in common with. Only then can society work properly.
P.S. - Do you know where trial by jury came from? It came from the notion that 12 people who knew the defendant and plaintiff were more likely to arrive at a fair judgement. At some point along the way, that was replaced with "let's make the decision of this important legal case depend on 12 people who have never met anyone involved in it, don't have a clue about law, and don't even want to be here". I guess the problem americans have with "socialism" is they don't understand the concept of "society".
Being that they are the least-educated state of the US, I would suggest both teachers and students find better time use than Facebook.
If the only way you can accept an assertion is by faith, then you are conceding that it can't be taken on its own merits
That is what having many alt accounts are for. My college had a law against it as well, but we used fake accounts to keep in touch between student/teacher. Our main accounts with our real names and such were used legit. With fake names you didn't know who was who.
I've had 5 fake accounts since before facebook was even popular when myspace was the thing. I never liked myspace since it was more kiddies and facebook was originally more college based.
I also have 4 fake accounts on google plus.
And here is the info, you want to sign up for multiple fake google plus accounts and need to get real names and such. well if you can't think up good names then use this. http://ssdi.rootsweb.ancestry.com/cgi-bin/ssdi.cgi
type in a name or 2 and you can get full info for your new social media fake persona screenshot example: http://camelot.bluecherry.net/ssiexample.jpg even down to the social security number, but ssn's aren't required on social media.
So enjoy setting up fake accounts and using those to interact with your teachers and such.
And yes it does work I've had multiple fake accounts along with a real account on facebook and google plus, my google plus fakes weren't purged like the rest were cause my fakes look real and not some obvious fake with names like duke nukem or whatnot of course it will get deleted.
Even after this law passes it won't stop us from staying in touch with teachers and students as those of us that know, use these methods. Including both students and teachers.
The teacher-student relationship is a professional one, and it's fine for it to be treated as such.
There are many other cases where rules exist to obviate a conflict of interest, which infringe on people's ability (otherwise) to do anything they want. Example: in certain jobs, you're not allowed to have a romantic relationship with a certain class of coworkers.
The only unfortunate part about this is, unlike most of the other precedent for this, the student can't easily opt out of being a particular teacher's student.
Take off every 'sig' !!
*sigh*
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
I believe you're referring to Mississippi, which usually rates near the bottom when it comes to education. Missouri is usually ranked near the center.
Never let a lack of data get in the way of a good rant.
I have three to four students per year (that's about 2% of my students) try to friend me. They are all turned down. Parents are usually notified too, because it makes me feel a little creepy (incidentally, I'm male, and all the requests have been from males; I think the girls are better at knowing it's creepy). It used to just be my policy, now it's the administration's policy. The teachers are almost universally a fan of this policy. Some teachers started course accounts on Facebook, separate from their personal accounts. What would be much better is to deploy technology with similar functionality on school networks, so that the school has control and supervision of the content. The kids can contact me through two separate legitimate channels (regular email and our web grading system), both of which I check more frequently than my Facebook account, with questions about grades, homework, course material, etc. These channels are monitored for everyone's protection. I agree with other posters though - most teachers already are not doing this, and school boards are making it policy already. The legislature probably wanted to make sure everybody was covered, and I can understand where they're coming from.
... teachers need to be told not to shit where they eat.
Aren't they supposed to be smart?
Before anyone starts spouting off about freedom of association, teachers are still free to associate with students on facebook, as long as they don't mind being unemployed. Jobs and companies have rules and aren't bound by constitutionally guaranteed freedoms, only the law enforcement and the judicial systems are, with regard to arresting and prosecuting people. Even with law enforcement, if you are a beat cop and you start running your mouth about the police commissioner, you will be fired if he finds out.
Much like you can't exercise your freedom of speech and draw a big sign letting everyone know how you really feel about your boss and still remain employed when you stand outside the front door of your company holding the sign. Sure you won't be arrested but you also won't be employed very long after that.
It's not smart for you to hang out with your customers/patients/students outside of the "office", unless it's sanctioned by your employer, especially if they are underaged and/or there are ethics issues. It's a no brainer to me. I'd think the teacher was a pedophile if they were chatting up my kid after hours behind my back.
Don't kid yourself. It's the size of the regexp AND how you use it that counts.
"Got it made, got it made, got it made...I'm hot for teacher!"
From the actual article:
... teachers will still be able to have a Facebook Page for interacting with students on a slightly more personal level, as long it’s still work-related. It’s the actual friending, messaging, and whatever other direct connection you can make on a social network that will not be allowed.
Maybe, I'm dense, but I don't see why this is a bad thing. Doctors aren't supposed to have a relationship with patients. Lawyers aren't supposed to have a relationship with clients. Detectives aren't supposed to have a relationship with a suspect, etc. Teachers already had these restrictions in Missouri and most other places. The only difference is that it now extends to online relationships.
sorry to dissapoint you but 3mbps is not zippingly fast either
Spend six hours a day with the spastic snot monkeys and see if you want to do anything but strangle them.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
This makes as much sense as suggesting that gun control will prevent gun crime. Inappropriate behavior between students and teachers is already illegal. Outlawing one medium for student-teacher communication just means they will find a different medium. This type of stuff has a tendency to route itself around roadblocks. The progression from a free country to a nanny state is sickening to watch. For those of you who have posted that this is a good law on the basis that a teacher with good common sense would already have this policy, my response to you is that it is not the government's place to legislate common sense. People should be free to make their own decisions, and the government should only step in when actual harm is caused. The act of friending a student on Facebook poses no harm in and of itself.
Overrated Moderation: This posts sucks... because.
This isn't in any way some anti-Facebook law, it's a knee-jerk reaction to a (now) 40-year-old who was molested by a teacher at age 12. Since the statute of limitations has long since expired on this but the politicians have to be seen to be doing something, they passed a check this/pry into that/disallow the other law. It's pretty much exactly what you'd expect if you got a bunch of politicians and social workers together and asked them for a generic "protect party X from party Y" law, with no clear idea of how they were to be protected, or exactly what from.
If this law is not ruled unconstitutional, we might as well just get rid of the damn thing
From the point of view of the teacher this is just regulation of a profession. Lawyers and doctors, for example, have restrictions on their freedom of speech in the form of (at the very least) client confidentiality. Anyone with a security clearance has his freedom of speech and of association limited.
The point is that in all of these cases, you accept limitations by joining that profession or remaining in it when the rules change. You can choose to pursue another profession, freeing yourself of the limitations you accepted . So IMHO IANAL it's not really a rights issue, especially if the state has a compelling interest.
Back to this case. From the point of the view of who hires almost all teachers, the government, this can be accomplished in the code of conduct for employees -- friend or accept friending by your students, get fired. For private schools, we don't accredit unless they also have this policy.
Why do we need a law?
But one question: Does this mean that homeschooling moms can't friend their kids to keep an eye on them?
Although it is not explicitly protected in the First Amendment, the Supreme Court ruled, in NAACP v. Alabama, 357 U.S. 449 (1958), freedom of association to be a fundamental right protected by it. I just cannot see how this can pass constitutional muster.
And how can someone in good faith even know? You started coaching track when you got out of college at 22. Now you are 42, and there's a 38-year-old in the recreational running club you are a member of (they have their own facebook page and friend each other). I hope you remember that he was in your PE class for part of a semester 20 years ago!
This is the same state that saw the suicide of Megan Meier.That incident got a lot of lawmakers here thinking about how to protect kids online.There is a lot of stuff in the law: about how schools have to have written policies regarding social networking, requiring background checks, etc. This line is the one that is too vague: Teachers also cannot have a nonwork-related website that allows exclusive access with a current or former student.
However, imagine you are a lawmaker, and a bill arrives on your desk with that line in it, but also these:
SECTION 168.021 - In order to obtain a teaching certificate, an applicant must complete a background check as provided in section 168.133.
SECTION 168.071 - The crimes of sexual contact with a student while on public school property as well as second and third degree sexual misconduct are added to the offenses for which a teacher's license or certificate may be revoked.
Are you really going to vote against this law?
I know plenty of students that have teachers as friends especially in university academia....seriously, when you get to a point where your peers are the ones that helped train you, this becomes stupid. I understand your 5th grade teacher should not be your close personal friend to you, but that would fall under a different category altogether no?
Isn't this a very clear violation of the First Amendment?
I spent three years as a high school teacher, and I had a personal policy: I would not accept any friend requests from any students in the school system, full stop. Once they graduate, I'd be happy to accept a friend request.
Unfortunately, not all teachers had the same personal policies, which extended to getting into a relationship with a freshman, marrying him two years after he graduates, and keeping one's job as a teacher.
Another nominee for this months "Most Stupid Law Contest".
It's not like they are natrually friends anyway.
Next Oklahoma will be passing a law making it illegal for the farmer and the cowman to be friends.
This is tyranny. The law should protect victims and punish wrongdoers, not curb innocent people's freedoms.
Even if a teacher has an actual relationship with a teenager, there is not necessarily a victim. Some of these relationships turn out successfully. For example, one such relationship has been going on for well over a decade: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mary_Kay_Letourneau
It takes a deranged mind to support arbitrary laws like this one. And it takes indoctrination in socialist child concentration camps to produce such minds.
Why do teachers and students need connected on Facebook and such at all? In high school I had access to my teachers during school time and that was enough. In college I had access to my teachers during the scheduled office hours and that was enough. Why do these kids need access to the teacher 24/7? And even then what are the teachers going to say "Come see me in class tomorrow? or during my office hours?" And I doubt students will be posting questions on the wall. And what teachers want more work in there low paying jobs? Other thoughts: Is this putting education on the cloud? Why have physical buildings for schools then? Why not just turn to cyber schools for everyone? I really think anything school related should be on equipment completely accessible by the school so they can "police" it ie: email, content, etc. Also what about the sex-ting and videoing each other that could go on. And finally where are the parents in all that? If parents are to be watching their kids while they surf why can't they help with the school work. Shouldn't the parents be involved in the kids school. If anything the parents should have contact with the teachers to see when tests are on and how the student is progressing and so on. Is this more of the "pass the buck" on the to the schools?
Paul: Father... father, the sleeper has awakened! - Dune
So, this sort of "conflict of interest" is deserving of laws, but lobbyists, politicans, wall street, etc having their hands in both pies at once with things that affect the nation by orders of magnitude greater, is all ok? Industry can regulate itself, right?
FB should use the term "Copula" (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/copula - "something that connects or links together. ")
I work as a tech assistant in a Missouri public school, and most schools and techs are confused on just about everything when it comes to this law, given the fact it is very vague on many things. The only thing we almost all can agree on is the fact is it's a completely stupid law and a complete waste of time, especially all the paperwork that's going to be necessary by schools as they adopt their policies to address this law.
A couple other things:
1) "Former" student refers only to a child who has not graduated and is 18 years or younger. There is a place in the actual bill which defines former student. So, any students who have graduated are allowed. It's just considering students who have moved on to different teachers or different schools.
2) One of the requirements is that any correspondence has to be viewable by a parent. Thus, the idea of a student having their own parent as a teacher or administrator will not matter, because they already have parental permission.
3) A current trend in education (and one I am/was looking to adopt myself) was using the concept of social networking in the classroom. Edmodo is a Facebook look-alike which can be used for instruction. There are other programs like Moodle, which do similar things. The problem with this law is now these wonderful educational resources, which children would be extremely enthusiastic about (and would also be much less wasteful when it comes to things like homework and essays and the like) are now up in the air, and probably illegal, because any parental involvement into this process might also violate FERPA laws (student privacy). It's a step backwards in the use of instructional technology.
This law was passed simply so state legislators could point to it when it comes time for re-election. The fact is it's absolutely asinine to have such a law, especially considering the gross and rampant amount of sexual predators in this country who are not teachers. Why not say the same for all government employees? Why not prohibit any adults from befriending any children? The danger is just the same and the harm is every bit as real.
At the end of the day, when this bill was dreamed up, teachers were a popular punching bag, and this law is just another shot at garnering re-election vote by throwing teachers under the bus. As we've all seen in the news over the last couple of years, when it comes to politicians, my great-uncle Matt had it right, "Line'em up and shoot'em all". In your best Missouri redneck accent, of course.
Lets break this down (emphasis mine):
"Teachers cannot establish, maintain, or use a work-related website unless it is available to school administrators and the child’s legal custodian, physical custodian, or legal guardian. Teachers also cannot have a nonwork-related website that allows exclusive access with a current or former student."
As far as my understanding of (for example lets use Facebook.com) a social site, there is the option of non-exclusive access available by its users; the entire internet-enabled world can read, view and even interact with the page, thus not being limited to any sort of exclusivity paradigm. The mere fact that a website allows exclusive access is akin to saying that a classroom allows a teacher and student to remain in it after the rest of the class has left. Should a teacher be fired for talking one on one with a student? What about if they met at a cafe, library, or other non-school, open and/or public facility/location to discuss life, the universe and fish? Etc.
This ruling is tantamount to stripping away their right to free assembly, freedom of speech and freedom of relations. Trying to micro-manage how a teacher teaches and lives their lives, and also managing the lives of the innocent seems very very wrong here.
user@host$ diff
If you live in a real community, especially a small one, you're going to know teachers socially, not just professionally. My high school music teacher was also my church choir director. At least one teacher's kid was my age. My history teacher was in the community theater group that I was in, and yes, community theater groups have parties with alcohol (don't remember if any were at his house.) One teacher hired a couple of students to do some logging work for a couple of days (so yes, I'm a lumberjack, and I'm still alive - today's paranoids would probably be more worried about that than about the occasional glass of wine.) It wasn't a problem.
There was one 25-year-old English teacher who could have passed for a student if she'd wanted to, so she probably worked harder at looking professional than the older teachers.
Bill Stewart
New Fast-Compression-only CPR http://preview.tinyurl.com/dy575ks
Please somebody help me out... Nowhere in the bill does it talk about Facebook. Furthermore, it seems to target any direct communication of teachers with students, including email and could (in spirit) be extended to text messages/phone calls (yeah, I know neither is a "website" but the spirit of the bill is to limit direct unmonitored communication between a teacher and a student). It also covers former students, which is a whole new level of idiocy.
It reads like Missouri children really need protection from those vicious aholes that try to teach them math. I mean really, what decent person would be teaching math?! This must be investigated!!!
Why let the state dictate so much? Let the parents decide how to spend that redistributed money to best take care of their families. http://www.pdfernhout.net/towards-a-post-scarcity-new-york-state-of-mind.html
A 21st century issue: the irony of technologies of abundance in the hands of those still thinking in terms of scarcity.
What a stupid insane ruling that is! Pompous idiots. Should also be illegal for State Governor's and Senate members to be online friends with large monopolistic commercially destructive corporations and financial institutions.
So what happens if the teacher and student use these social networks to make connections for study use? Doh!
When shit hits the fan get some of these https://youtu.be/pY-GncsZ-UE
It's not hard to understand there's a requirement and venue for professional conduct to be fulfilled here. Visible separation of personal matters, avoidance of fraternization with pupils, and overall maintenance of basic principles of trust all go a long way toward making any school dependable. Where personal matters interfere with access to learning or a teacher's impartiality becomes compromised, this inevitably becomes a serious problem for others, hence why it gets so much coverage in the media.
The need for professionalism also becomes FAR less difficult to understand when you look at how many teachers have gone to court in just the past five years for giving/receiving a good hard dicking by one of their students.
Remember folks, they're there to teach your kids intellectually and emotionally. It's perfectly healthy to draw the line at that.
Making a law around this issue speaks to the fact it's become a serious problem, and it also quietly insists that the problem has become so severe the schools no longer are able to handle it by themselves. All that seems to show is a fundamental lack of proper hiring practices. If you have to worry this much about the excesses and sexual proclivities of your staff, and you feel you need a new law in place just to see that the basic concepts of honour and trust are carried out on a daily basis, then you've hired the wrong crowd -- period -- and your own inexperience and ignorance flies in the face of everyone who's actually doing their job properly.
The more these types of laws are created, the more it takes away from the school's ability to learn from its mistakes, and the more disservice we all do to education.
There are already laws dealing with child predators. Use them.
I have a couple teachers and even a former administrator from the hs that I went to as a friend on facebook, and I added all of them before I graduated. Nothing bad ever came from it. People need to keep in mind that facebook is far more public than a public street. Teachers and students have been having liasons before facebook, and I doubt facebook makes it any easier.
Fuck Beta
What's so special about teachers? Shouldn't all online relationships between adults and minors be illegal? And why only online?
I know this is probably redundant, but can someone explain to me how anyone could consider this to be in any way constitutional?
I'm serious. Maybe I just don't understand a couple of the amendments.
sic transit gloria mundi