California School District Hires Firm To Monitor Students' Social Media

An anonymous reader writes "A suburban Los Angeles school district is taking a novel approach to tackling the problem of cyber-bullying. It's paying a company to snoop on students' social media pages. 'The district in Glendale, California, is paying $40,500 to a firm to monitor and report on 14,000 middle and high school students' posts on Twitter, Facebook and other social media for one year. Though critics liken the monitoring to government stalking, school officials and their contractor say the purpose is student safety. As classes began this fall, the district awarded the contract after it earlier paid the firm, Geo Listening, $5,000 last spring to conduct a pilot project monitoring 9,000 students at three high schools and a middle school. Among the results was a successful intervention with a student "who was speaking of ending his life" on his social media, said Chris Frydrych, CEO of the firm.'"

Comments

Again, the ends justify the means?

[Nefarious Wheel]

Haven't we grown out of "the ends justify the means" yet?

Re:Again, the ends justify the means?

[kylemonger]

It's not about safety as much as it is about ass covering. The schools have been driven to this. Parents won't keep their children off the Internet. But when a child is bullied into committing suicide the school gets sued because they are a convenient target and because the law requires that children be educated, which for most people means sending children to public school.

Re:Again, the ends justify the means?

[gd2shoe]

Though critics liken the monitoring to government stalking, school officials and their contractor say the purpose is student safety.

Uh, yes, and yes? The two aren't mutually exclusive.

Re:Again, the ends justify the means?

[fahrbot-bot]

Haven't we grown out of "the ends justify the means" yet?

You must be new here - I mean to the planet - welcome. Watch your back, we're a narrow-minded, short-sighted, fucked-up species.

Re:Again, the ends justify the means?

[interkin3tic]

I'm skeptical it's not just paranoia and ignorance on the part of the schools. Kids aren't going to stop being horrible to one another, kids aren't going to realize that high school drama isn't anything to kill yourself over, parents aren't going to stop grieving when their kids die, and lawyers aren't going to stop taking advantage of their grief and schools' funds just because schools hired a guy to watch them. Use common sense and do what's right (IE not violating student's rights and wasting money).

You'll get sued the same amount either way.

Re: Again, the ends justify the means?

[briancox2]

I remember one day, not so long ago really, a school was there to focus on a purpose. And that was to educate. They didn't get into all of these other side purposes which distract them and disperse their ability to focus.

When you think everything is your responsibility, you will not be doing well at the thing that really is your responsibility. You can bank on that.

Re:Again, the ends justify the means?

[ewhenn]

It's all about ass-covering.... until it backfires. Seriously, they are a school, not the Internet police. On top of that, I think court wise this could actually make them *more* vulnerable. Say the firm they hire *does* tell them about something, and action isn't taken. Now the school had a written report sent to the administrators and didn't do enough, at least that's how it would be framed by a suing attorney. I think that scenario is a lot more damning than simply taking the position that: "We are a school, we are responsible to educate kids, not keep track of their Facebook updates".

Re: Again, the ends justify the means?

[meerling]

Not to mention going way outside their area.
If it's not being done on/with school computers, they shouldn't have anything to do with it.
They are supposed to be educators, not full time nannies/social police.

Re:Again, the ends justify the means?

[Anonymous Coward]

When did parents stop being the ones considered responsible for their child's well-being?

Re:Again, the ends justify the means?

[Belial6]

No, it isn't about ass covering. This move creates far more liability than it removes. This is about the school system pushing farther and farther into the role of parent in an attempt to increase the size of their bureaucracy and thus the amount of funding they get. This school has just declared that it is their responsiblility to stop kids from commuting suicide.

No doubt they will soon be complaining that they are held responsible for the responsibilities they have demanded.

Re:Again, the ends justify the means?

[Nyder]

When did parents stop being the ones considered responsible for their child's well-being?

Blame the internet. See before the internet, your parent knew you did fucked up shit, but didn't really have any proof. Now that it's posted on fb, twitter, and whatever else is cool, parents are aware of what their kids are getting up to. So they want to blame the school, otherwise they feel that fault would be there own.

As for bullying, we are a culture of being bullies. It's in our movies, our tv shows, it's how business get bigger, it's how America treats the rest of the world. By being a bully. It's what we teach our kids, that you have to be mean to get ahead. That you can get anyone to do what you want by threatening them in some way, either physical, mental, and/or economically. So yes, kids are quick, they pick up on what adults do, and they copy it.

But hey, it's the internet age, we can blame everyone else for our failures.

Re:Again, the ends justify the means?

[Seumas]

Doesn't matter. We've now had enough generations of public education breeding conformity into people that they have little or no expectation of privacy and almost no knowledge of their protected liberties.

Think of it this way: You and I probably remember a time when you didn't even need ID to get on a domestic flight and you could walk someone right up to their gate and see them off.

Anyone born in the last two or so decades won't remember this. They'll be familiar with an experience where you are treated like a criminal by a bunch of low-wage thugs with plastic badges who grope you and inspect you . . . and who also expand their scope to far outside the airport, to nearly any public place. Kids born today will only know a world where everything they do any time and anywhere is monitored, documented, archived, shared, and used against them by their government. If this is what they grow up around, what will they *allow* to change during their time, that kids born in five or ten years will, then, consider normal for *them*?

All of this originates with the expectations and demands set at home and school. Authority must be followed. Questions are not allowed. Critical thinking is discouraged. Individualism and standing up for yourself makes you a target.

Re:Again, the ends justify the means?

[BlueStrat]

Haven't we grown out of "the ends justify the means" yet?

Human nature being what it is, that's something that people never learn until they suddenly wake up one day and find *they've* just been deemed an "obstacle" to some government "end" which must be removed. Of course by then it's a little too late.

People are shit. People in government are shit on warp drive with afterburners. Why should or would anyone think allowing corrupt, power-hungry, arrogant, and greedy government shits (yes, even your guys) more and more powers and more and more of *our* money to use against us is a good idea?

Want to know what would go a LONG ways towards fixing lots of things wrong with both the government overstepping and the economy and make the rest not directly affected easier to rein in?

Look up the US "Depression of 1920-21" (without quotes). President Warren G. Harding slashed government size and spending by nearly half. This was a leading factor that put the "roar" in the "Roaring Twenties" that saw fantastic growth and economic expansion.

Having a much smaller government without endless government buildings filled full of bureaucrats trying to micro-regulate everything under the sun, and that doesn't control as much wealth or distort the markets so badly, makes it much easier for citizens to assure accountability and make corruption that much harder to hide.

Hard for some seriously-disturbed government hack to build a "Star Trek"-esque "Information Dominance Center" and spy on everyone including Granny and her nine cats if the agency has just barely enough resources and manpower to perform it's limited and accountably-authorized duties in a legal and constitutional manner and still meet payroll.

Just like fire, one must limit the amount of "fuel" (powers, scope, size, budgets, etc) one allows any government, or like fire, one will be consumed when it grows out of control as we are seeing happen in the US.

Starve the beast. Before it eats everything and everyone. This isn't a partisan political issue. It's a civil rights issue for every US citizen regardless of ideology, race, religion, or politics. If the US goes totalitarian, it's going to also be a huge problem for the rest of the world.

Not to Godwin, but imagine what a Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pot, or Mussolini could and would do with the natural and economic resources of the US and it's military/industrial/intelligence complex.

That's what the world has to look forward to if things don't dramatically change in the US, and soon, because that's the direction the US is heading rapidly.

Strat

Re:Again, the ends justify the means?

[Anonymous Coward]

What rights are you speaking of here? Is anyone getting wiretapped?

If you refer to Facebook et al., it's not illegal to view what someone has been dumb enough to post on the internet for all to view. For any 'spying' to occur, the pursuant must actually gain access to information disclosed from a non-public source. Refusing to cover your ears while someone shouts at the top of their lungs does not fall into this category.
Also, $40k per year is not much compared to what a lawsuit will cost. Perhaps over 50 years it might compare, but there is also the added benefit of one or more children being alive (which may be important to the related people).
In the end, I would rather see the affected communities spend their money on prevention of suicide than defense in a suicide-related lawsuit.

Re:Again, the ends justify the means?

[fuzzyfuzzyfungus]

I suspect that if they thought they could get away with that, they would. Taking the 'not our fucking problem' position costs substantially less than hiring a contractor to make it your problem.

Re:Again, the ends justify the means?

[Anonymous Coward]

... before the internet ...

The bullying ended at the front fence. Now, twitter and SMS can constantly torture any child who depends on their iPhone. Which reveals another problem.

... Now that it's posted on ...

Which means the parents, facebook, twitter and whatever is turning a blind eye to what the delinquents are doing. The school didn't give a phone and login account to the child, why does it pay the cost of consumption?

... they pick up on what adults do, and they copy it.

Yes they do. Also, to copy another post: "only physical strength and ferocity matter" to a child. This makes children naturally sociopathic. That is, a child will inflict whatever damage possible which does not invoke punishment. So schools which ignore the attacker are rewarding crime.

Re:Again, the ends justify the means?

[Jade_Wayfarer]

Obligatory SMBC.

Re:Again, the ends justify the means?

[MaskedSlacker]

Maybe this has changed in the United States of Fascism, but every where else in the world, if someone is hired to stalk you 24/7, that is generally considered spying. Even if they only observe you when you're in public.

Re:Again, the ends justify the means?

[Arker]

No. People are really that stupid.

Re:Again, the ends justify the means?

[TWiTfan]

Haven't we grown out of "the ends justify the means" yet?

Never have and never will.

Re:Again, the ends justify the means?

[drinkypoo]

The only thing that will stop kids from being horrible to one another is if it's taken seriously when it happens. This is a first step towards that. If kids are held accountable for their bullying of other students, it will stop. THAT is what is missing. I was regularly bullied and my reports always fell on deaf ears because it usually came from jocks and I went to jock schools; Del Mar Middle School, Branciforte Jr. Jigh, and Harbor High in Santa Cruz County. These are all bastions of child abuse. The former of them even kicked me out for winning a fight, finally.

Public school is child abuse. Even if your child does well there, they'll be learning lessons that make the world a worse place.

Re:Again, the ends justify the means?

[Phreakiture]

Irrelevant. Everything that is on facebook was put there by somebody who chose to put it there. If they put it on public display, then they chose to put it on public display. It's published, therefore it is public. This public information is available to anybody and everybody. As long as the school does not require the students to friend them or turn over passwords, what's the issue?

That said, this could teach students two very important things: reputation management and subterfuge. These are good things to know in an emergent surveillance state.

Re:Again, the ends justify the means?

[Anonymous Coward]

It would be hilarious if people start creating social media accounts to post made up shit using the names of the students.

Re:Again, the ends justify the means?

[Oligonicella]

You're a troll (obviously the reason you AC), but for anyone else who has followed this far:
It's relevant to the article because they are "searching for possible violence, drug use, bullying, truancy and suicidal threats.". Got that, you stupid bastard? They are searching for evidence with no crime, crime outside of school not being in their job description in the first place.

The 24/7 is an reference obvious to the literate and non-troll of the fact that a child's FaceBook account is accessed by them for them to post their personal thoughts 24/7. You purposely conflate that to the spy working 24/7. You do this because you know it to be untrue, yet it vaguely sounds as if it supports your screed. Note to you: it does not.

To educate your obviously fascist ass, in the US your personal time is of no business to an outside agency NOT involved with law enforcement and (ideally) not even them without PRIOR reason.

Regardless of their reasoning , it's called intrusion. As has become painfully obvious to anyone with their head out in the open air, our government employees from the pres to the schoolteacher have decided that they are our keepers instead of servants and that their self-appointed duty to oversee us is to our benefit. No, it is not. As relates to 'educators', this stance presents itself in their deciding what political t-shirts are allowed, which hero (God, in one case) an elementary school child may write about, which political candidate to support by having them sing creepy songs of praise ala Kim and other various dispicable acts hitting the newslines daily. And, of course, their thinking that they should surviel you for "your protection".

Simply put Snookums, it is not their fucking job.

But you either already knew all that and you're simply fascistic or you are ignorant and simply a damned fool. Both of those states of being deserve derision.

Got all that Sparky?

Am I being all mean and cndescending to you? Bet your ass. Go tell your teacher.

Re:Again, the ends justify the means?

[Oligonicella]

I agree with you except for your first statement. It's only been in the last two. Prior to that, schools did not act like this. I was there.

Re:Again, the ends justify the means?

[Anonymous Coward]

Irrelevant. Everything that is on facebook was put there by somebody who chose to put it there. If they put it on public display, then they chose to put it on public display.

No, that's irrelevant. What is relevant is that the school's involvement with the students ends when the kids leave school. If they want to snoop on what is getting posted FROM the school's access points, that's one thing. But hiring a company to monitor the kids outside of formal activities is vastly exceeding their mandate, regardless of the rationale behind it.

Re:Again, the ends justify the means?

[Charliemopps]

I agree on the ass-covering but the bulling IS the schools fault. I was very much a victim of it in highschool. I was "The guy" that got bullied. Every school has one. The kids knew it, the teachers knew it, the principle knew it. For some reason the adults in charged seemed to thing it was somehow my fault. I was hyperactive (annoying) and I didn't fight back... the perfect target. I reached a tipping point late in my senior year and proceeded to beat the shit out of anyone that even remotely tried to bully me. That's when I learned the truth... The school didn't do anything to you for assaulting another student. I took one bully by the back of the head and repeatedly smashed his face into a urinal and the gym teacher walked in and said "come on guys, knock it off" that was it...

To this day I still cannot fathom how my children are safer in a biker bar than they are a public school. If you punch someone in a bar, the police are called and you go to jail. If you do it in a public school, at worst, you spend some time in the principles office or get suspended. Physical violence in a public school should involve the police... every time.

Re:Again, the ends justify the means?

[EzInKy]

They hired the firm in attempt to take action because something is happening. If they did nothing then they would be held liable for ignoring the problem.

Re:Again, the ends justify the means?

[drinkypoo]

This is the problem with the progressive mindset right here. All of the other steps dont count.

All what other steps? No school I've ever attended ever did anything meaningful, or indeed anything at all, to stop bullying. In fact, the faculty regularly encouraged and enabled it.

Re:Again, the ends justify the means?

[Aonghus142000]

After reading your whiny post, I find it entirely believable that you were bullied in school until you decided to stand up for yourself. "My name is Sue. How do you do? Now you gonna die...."

Re:Again, the ends justify the means?

[Mystakaphoros]

It would be hilarious if people start creating social media accounts to post made up shit using the names of the students.

And no catty 13-year-old would *ever* do that.

Re:Again, the ends justify the means?

[Jesus_666]

I'm sorry for you but that doesn't apply to all schools.

The school I went to for fifth and sixth class was a cesspool of violence. It's also an underfunded school in a village with massive integration problems. That school is where teachers' careers go to die. The faculty isn't useful for anything and they don't enter the schoolyard during recess because they both don't give a crap and fear the children.

After that I came to a school where the faculty actually cares. We had bullying in our class. It greatly reduced in intensity when the headmaster showed up, gave the bully a dressing-down in front of the class and had him spend recess walking over the schoolyard while holding hands with the bully-ee - and promised that he'd monitor the situation and react appropriately in the future. (It helps that the now-retired headmaster was respected by the students on account of being generally awesome.)

Schools can be horrible with bullying but not all of them are. Both of the ones I attended are public; one just happens to be in a social hotspot and the other one isn't and has a really engaged faculty.

Re:Again, the ends justify the means?

[Mystakaphoros]

No, it isn't about ass covering. This move creates far more liability than it removes. This is about the school system pushing farther and farther into the role of parent in an attempt to increase the size of their bureaucracy and thus the amount of funding they get. This school has just declared that it is their responsiblility to stop kids from commuting suicide. No doubt they will soon be complaining that they are held responsible for the responsibilities they have demanded.

Yeah, the first time a parent says, "But you told us you were watching our kids 24/7! How then did my children get into a fight at the shopping mall?"

Re:Again, the ends justify the means?

[drinkypoo]

Sorry, I'm talking about the USA here, which is the default when we're dealing with an American website. Only private schools in the USA have headmasters. In the USA we have principals, and they're mostly administrators. They rarely deal with a student. In my elementary school I had an interested and engaged principal, and in the alternative high school I went to briefly, but never otherwise.

The vast majority of schools aren't in a wealthy area.

Re:Again, the ends justify the means?

[Mystakaphoros]

To this day I still cannot fathom how my children are safer in a biker bar than they are a public school. If you punch someone in a bar, the police are called and you go to jail. If you do it in a public school, at worst, you spend some time in the principles office or get suspended.

Depends. There are a fair number of schools with officers patrolling the halls; the one I taught at had at least one student tazed and dragged out into the patrol car per year.

Re:Again, the ends justify the means?

[SuricouRaven]

Kids are horrible to one another. They always have been, they always will be. They have been horrible to each other since before they could even qualify as homo, let alone sapian. They'll continue to be horrible until humans go extinct. There is absolutely nothing you can do to stop this.

Re:Again, the ends justify the means?

[Kielistic]

So you agree that this "first step" may be better replaced with some other step?

Re:Again, the ends justify the means?

[dinfinity]

You must be new here - I mean to the planet - welcome. Watch your back, we're a narrow-minded, short-sighted, fucked-up country.

FTFY.

Re:Again, the ends justify the means?

[MaskedSlacker]

Thank for affirming that in that shithole of a country, 24/7 stalking is considered a good thing.

Re:Again, the ends justify the means?

[drinkypoo]

So you agree that this "first step" may be better replaced with some other step?

Sure, why not? What did you have in mind?

Re:Again, the ends justify the means?

[david_thornley]

I wasn't a perfect parent, although I think I did well. What was I supposed to do when my son was bullied in school? I talked to the school officials, who basically told me they were doing what they could. (They took the complaint seriously, and took some action, but it didn't stop the bullies.) I talked to my kid. At one point, when bullies tried to push him down the stairs, I told him to do what he thought necessary and I'd back him up. (The school officials didn't like that, but I didn't care. As far as I'm concerned, they can defend kids or allow them to defend themselves, any other choice being immoral. This was not a universally shared opinion in the school district.)

What solved the problem was moving him to another school.

If anybody knows what I could have done to stop the bullies, please let me know.

Re:Again, the ends justify the means?

[anyGould]

Irrelevant. Everything that is on facebook was put there by somebody who chose to put it there. If they put it on public display, then they chose to put it on public display. It's published, therefore it is public. This public information is available to anybody and everybody. As long as the school does not require the students to friend them or turn over passwords, what's the issue?

The article seems to tapdance around that angle (particularly on how they know which accounts are tied to which student), so it may be as innocent as "show me all postings from people who list "SchoolX" as their school (and countermeasures might be as simple as changing security settings and blocking "Geo Listening"). Quick search of the school board site only says that they block social media at school.

So really, some local hacker-space needs to put out a quick "how to keep your school from snooping all over your shite" primer as a good-will measure.

That said, this could teach students two very important things: reputation management and subterfuge. These are good things to know in an emergent surveillance state.

I'll also be amused to see how long it takes for someone to successfully troll the monitors. Get to work kids!

Re:Again, the ends justify the means?

[anyGould]

Depends on the school. Some places treat fighting back as a crime (apparently it's OK to beat the hell out of kids as long as you do it *regularly* - but heaven forbid you fight back for the first time!), and some places have a head on their shoulders and can differentiate instigator from defender. (You still get the lecture, but they don't make a federal case out of it.)

But I'll be giving my kid the same advice my father gave me - fair fights are for people who want to fight. If someone picks a fight with you and you can't walk away, then fight dirty and end it fast.

Re:Again, the ends justify the means?

[s0nicfreak]

What solved the problem was moving him to another school.

That right there is what you are suppose to do. If your kid is being bullied and the school won't kick out the bully, you remove your kid. Schools are paid based on attendance; removing your child means they get less money. If more people were willing to remove their children due to bullying, schools would start kicking out the 1 bully to keep the 10 kids he's bullying. Parents would teach their kid to cut that shit out, because now instead of just sending Bully Jimmy out the door to walk to school every day, they have to get up early and drive him to school across town. And most importantly, your kid isn't forced to return to be bullied day after day.

Dumb?

[Anonymous Coward]

What about the people that aren't retarded and block everyone?

Simply Awful

[b4upoo]

Observation outside the school for criminal activities is a police function. The last thing we need is another police like agency that calls itself part of a school system.

Re:Simply Awful

[Anonymous Coward]

Observation outside the school for criminal activities is a police function.

Everyone must do their part for the police state. By the way, you haven't filled your quota of neighbour reports this week. Get to work or you will go to a resort in a beautiful Caribbean island for rehabilitation. Some people love it so much they never come back.

captcha: sentinel

Re:Simply Awful

[Anonymous Coward]

First and foremost observation of a child is a parental function that if done well and assisted properly and not excessively by the community, becomes a self function. We really don't need a police state in or out of the schools.

Re:Simply Awful

[Anonymous Coward]

Observation outside the school for criminal activities is a police function.

Definitely.

Seriously, why don't you just fix the fucked up environment that school's create so that the authority figures are actually approachable so students with problems won't feel scared to talk to them?

Oh wait, everything in the modern era is powered by the fear train and requires scaring/terrorizing everybody to the best of your ability to keep them in line which prevents any sort of healthy social fabric from existing anywhere, let alone inside a school.

Re:Simply Awful

[AHuxley]

Was 2010 forgotten?
http://www.forbes.com/sites/velocity/2010/02/18/teachers-spy-on-student-via-webcam/
http://yro.slashdot.org/story/10/02/22/1814248/school-spying-scandal-gets-even-more-bizarre

Re:Simply Awful

[tftp]

Seriously, why don't you just fix the fucked up environment that school's create

You can fix that with one and only one change: students must be able to pick and choose who they want - and, most importantly, don't want - to interact with. Someone hurt you, or is scary - banish him from your presence, for a while or forever. This will be self-regulating, unless the student wants to be all alone (and, actually, that is fine as well.) Those bans must work everywhere - in class, and in halls, and in the street. (Too much to ask for, but that's the spec.)

The whole problem is that (a) students have no say in who they are working with, *AND* (b) they have no means to control behavior of others. Adults have both of those options. I don't know why so many ancient writers say that childhood is the best time of anyone's life ... in my opinion, it's the worst time (aside from deathbed, perhaps.) Children have no rights; everyone is a superior; noncompliance is punished; complaints are not accepted; crimes can be committed against you with no recourse... Hell, as soon as I was done with school I ran away and never looked back. The adult world is simply heaven, compared to the wolfpack-like society of children where only physical strength and ferocity matter.

Re:Simply Awful

[SecurityGuy]

This really isn't true. Students don't need to be able to ban everyone and anyone. Schools do need to kick out the small minority of incorrigible troublemakers who aren't there to learn anyway, and who ruin the learning environment for those who are.

That's a lot of why child society is the way it is. Schools tolerate it. I actually had another parent come to me because one of my kids was teasing one of hers. For months. To the point where her child didn't want to go to school. The school knew the whole time and didn't say a word to me. When I had a cow and pointed out their no-bullying policy, they said it didn't qualify. WTF?

We don't need draconian solutions, we just need to implement the actual solutions that are available right now. We used to call them discipline.

Re:Simply Awful

[Sique]

Schools do need to kick out the small minority of incorrigible troublemakers who aren't there to learn anyway, and who ruin the learning environment for those who are.

The problem is that the main troublemakers are often quite intelligent and good pupils with a lot of friends at school. You have to be in a position of power to be able to continiously harass people without getting into trouble yourself. It's not the big redhaired stepchild, who mainly harasses other children, it's often the captain of the football team, the winner of the literacy contest or the class speaker. What you consider the actual trouble is the angry and helpless reaction of the weaker children, which then get punished for being angry and helpless.

Re:Simply Awful

[Jason Levine]

Interesting idea in theory, but it would fail miserably in practice. For example, suppose Sally, Debbie, and Barbara are best friends until Sally and Barbara have a falling out. Sally enacts the "ban anyone I don't want to talk to" provision and Barbara's class schedule gets moved around so Sally doesn't have to see her... with the added "bonus" of Debbie and Barbara being kept apart. So now Sally is making sure that Debbie remains HER friend and NOT Barbara's. This could easily be used by the head of an "in" group to maintain social control. Do anything against them and you get kicked out of the "in kid" schedule.

Or would the ban work the other way around? Sally doesn't want to be near Barbara anymore (say because she found out that Barbara posted an embarrassing photo of Sally online) so Sally needs to change classes. But her best friend Debbie is in the classes as well. So now she needs to choose between being abused by Barbara and being separated from her friends.

This says nothing about the level of complexity that this would impose on the schools. How do you rearrange schedules so that no two kids are in class together when they're said they don't want to be? How do you chart their hall paths so they don't cross? Or control student movement so that the kids don't skip class to torment someone in the halls? There's no way that schools would be able to keep up with this.

Re:Simply Awful

[drinkypoo]

The problem is that the main troublemakers are often quite intelligent and good pupils with a lot of friends at school. You have to be in a position of power to be able to continiously harass people without getting into trouble yourself.

Well, they're often in a position of power, but they're rarely intelligent or good pupils.

It's not the big redhaired stepchild, who mainly harasses other children, it's often the captain of the football team, the winner of the literacy contest or the class speaker.

The TEACHERS are the biggest bullies, and their disrespect for the students set the tone. When the kids see them treat you with disrespect, they know they can do the same. And when they get away with it, it becomes open season. Every single time I bothered to report abuse against me, and we're talking about physical abuse that often left a mark, not just the ubiquitous emotional abuse, it was ignored. That sends a message to the children that they should be bullies all their lives.

Regardless, the only people who were ever kind to me in junior high to high school were the academic achievers. But then, I went to jock schools.

Re:Simply Awful

[tftp]

Do anything against them and you get kicked out of the "in kid" schedule.

This is already true, and it was true forever. You cannot force anyone to invite you to events, or even accept you as a guest outside of school.

Sally enacts the "ban anyone I don't want to talk to" provision and Barbara's class schedule gets moved around so Sally doesn't have to see her... with the added "bonus" of Debbie and Barbara being kept apart.

Where will that "added bonus" come from? S remains all alone, while D & B can be together if they both wish so - just not with S present. Students are vertices of a graph. Each vertice can have an edge to any other vertice. For example, take an IM software where a student opens an independent window to talk to a specific person. D & B may be chatting, and D & S may be chatting, but the edge between S and B is blocked by S's request.

The proposed model is an ideal goal. Existence of only one class is a limiting factor. The school should be able to provide up to N classes to up to N students. (The limit will be used up if all students choose to be alone.) I agree that the current model of school will not work here. At the same time, online education will. As I said, this is not a shovel-ready project. But on the other hand this is the only configuration which allows students to pick and choose who they interact with. Otherwise you will be forcing Sally to see Barbara every single day. Columbine events would have never happened if those two guys could click a button and insulate themselves from those jocks who bullied them.

Re:Simply Awful

[tftp]

Students don't need to be able to ban everyone and anyone. Schools do need to kick out the small minority of incorrigible troublemakers who aren't there to learn anyway, and who ruin the learning environment for those who are.

It's far better to let students to vote on who is and who isn't their friend. A person may be nice and sweet while teacher is present, and then turn Mr. Hyde the second the teacher is gone. There is no direct link between being a good student and being a good friend. Huckleberry Finn, for example, was a pretty bad student, and he seldom obeyed orders. As a human, however, he was more decent than average. Children should have freedom of association; they are not idiots in this aspect. Even dogs in a pack are free to stay or to go. The modern society, however, grabs a random collection of dogs and puts them into one cage. No surprise that some of them get hurt - they can't get away.

Re:Simply Awful

[SecurityGuy]

What you consider the actual trouble is the angry and helpless reaction of the weaker children, which then get punished for being angry and helpless.

Not at all. The powers that be generally act that way. I actually agree with you. We had a kid in my high school snap and smack someone with a chair. One of the heavy metal and stone-like plastic ones. HE wasn't a problem, he just got tired of being harassed day after day and no one else was doing anything about it. He was a very smart kid who, left to his own devices, never caused one bit of trouble with anyone.

Re:Simply Awful

[prelelat]

It's a bunch of people hired to creep on kids who don't know or care to set their privacy settings responsibly enough. What the school should really be doing is sitting these kids down and talking about proper use of the internet, predators and how they can use public information. Instead of helping these kids grow up they want to track and follow them for infractions.

It's fucked up really, I mean what happens when one student sets up an account for another student so that they can post inflammatory things. Does this group somehow know which accounts were created by actual students and which ones weren't?

You can justify anything I suppose but maybe in the end it will be a lesson to these kids not to post stupid shit to the internet, that way when they get older they won't do it. Only silver lining I can think of.

Re:Simply Awful

[tftp]

Well, I'm aware that homeschooling has deficiencies. However for most of human history children did not go to school to socialize... and nevertheless they ended up being normal people. Do you have an explanation for such a weird thing? A human child, raised outside of a special incubator... no, can't be!

Note: I have no desire to "interact socially" with peddlers of drugs, thieves, and street fighters. I would want to associate with people like myself - and them only. Is that something I should be denied, or to be ashamed of? If not, I demand that right.

Re:Simply Awful

[david_thornley]

There's a difference between looking at things publicly available (behavior in public, postings on social media) and spying on kids' bedrooms. This is, at least, on the legal side of the line.

Re:Simply Awful

[bingoUV]

Students are vertices of a graph. Each vertice can have an edge to any other vertice

No, classes are cliques.

The limit will be used up if all students choose to be alone

No, it will be used when no set of cliques the students can be arranged into. Other than the trivial set of cliques with each child a separate clique into oneself, of course.

This can happen in remarkably more ways than if each child were a loner. It also leads to injustices like:
A wants to be with B, C.
C wants to be with A, not B.
B wants to be with A, not C.

Now If you choose sets (A,B) (C), C is punished and B is rewarded for no reason. Similar injustice with (A,C) (B).

You have to take into consideration that NOT wanting to be with someone is to be prioritized over wanting to be with someone? At the expense of loneliness?

Re:Simply Awful

[tftp]

There is no injustice if (A,B)(C) and (A,C)(B) are temporally or otherwise separated. For example, some law of nature may prevent B and C from ever coming into contact. But each is free to contact A, as long as the other is not around - say, they live in different cities, and A travels.

Will that affect A? Sure; in the same way if A is the husband, B is A's wife, and C is A's mistress :-)

Re:Simply Awful

[bingoUV]

If all of them are NOT travelling, which is the typical state of a typical person, either B or C is forced to be alone for no fault of theirs.

Re:Simply Awful

[s0nicfreak]

Nothing you just said is correct.

Please...

[not_surt]

Won't somebody think of the tax-payers.

Re:Please...

[CHIT2ME]

You must be childless, sorry! For the last 2 or 3 decades all I've heard is about cuts to education funding. It all boils down to; YOU GET WHAT YOU PAY FOR!!!

Can't complain about privacey

[Anonymous Coward]

As creepy as this is, if you broadcast your life in the clear using social media then you relay are in no position to complain about people listening too you!

Re:Can't complain about privacey

[Anonymous Coward]

If the school district was paying $40k for a guy to drive around in a van and watch your children in "public" places through binoculars, you'd be grabbing a torch and pitchfork and demanding the principal's head on a plate.

But instead they're paying $40k to monitor your children's "public" conversations online, and you think its A-OK.

What the fuck is wrong with you?

Re:Can't complain about privacey

[gsslay]

They already pay guys to do this, so what's the big deal?

They pay guys to watch your children in school. These guys don't need to use binoculars, they get right up close and even speak to your children! They are called teachers.

They pay guys to check on your children if they are shouting in public places. And some of these guys have vans! They are called police.

If you're letting your children online to conduct private conversations in public, then it's your head that should be on the plate.

Re:Can't complain about privacey

[The-Ixian]

I believe this as well.
 
This is an issue that I run in to more and more these days, usually among younger people who grew up on the Internet. They tend to have the opinion that the personal stuff they post on the Internet should never be allowed to be viewed or used by people they didn't intend it for.
 
I get exasperated trying to explain that the Internet is a public place, like a bus station, except that when you speak loudly on the Internet, your voice echoes forever.

Re:Can't complain about privacey

[sociocapitalist]

As creepy as this is, if you broadcast your life in the clear using social media then you relay are in no position to complain about people listening too you!

Depends.

If the [ private | public ] agency doing the spying on the kids uses false pretenses to encourage FB 'friendship' in order to snoop that wouldn't be the same thing as 'broadcasting your life in the clear'. More of a multicast to approved receivers.

Re:Can't complain about privacey

[Oligonicella]

Speaking of false analogies....

We are not complaining about some Joe on the street reading your 24/7 postings and getting a chuckle or posting a vitriol laden response. We are talking about a governmental agency reading them and then intruding into your life with government backing if *they* deem what you post is unacceptable to them.

You say NSA snooping is bad and yet a school's snooping isn't. Yet both are doing the exact same thing and claiming it's "for you protection".

By the way, your using all caps and my using bold and italic are appeals to emotion.

Re:Can't complain about privacey

[Anonymous Coward]

They pay guys to watch your children in school. These guys don't need to use binoculars, they get right up close and even speak to your children! They are called teachers.
They pay guys to check on your children if they are shouting in public places. And some of these guys have vans! They are called police.

So then how do you justify the people paid to watch your children in school spending your money to watch them in public places? As you pointed out, we already have people called "Police" being paid to do that.

This isn't about the school hiring a PI to check into specific reports of "bullying" which are directly related to the school environment. It's about the school exceeding their mandate as educators and assuming a role in society which is outside their responsibility.
Suicide does NOT happen as a result of bullying. Bullying is an excuse. Suicide happens when a child has an emotional problem, and while I'll agree that can be aggravated by bullying it's not a result of it.

Re:Can't complain about privacey

[gsslay]

If you believe that bullying can't cause emotional problems, then you must have a very limited idea of what bullying is.

The key difference about online abuse is that it does not respect physical boundaries. It's not like you can label it as something that happened either inside or outside the school boundaries. It's everywhere at all times. So a school saying "we shouldn't be doing anything about this post, because it was sent from a home computer, but we should do something about this post, because it was from a phone during school hours" is not a tenable position to take.

Re:Can't complain about privacey

[bingoUV]

So you have a suspicion this agency will have power/resources comparable to NSA's by any stretch of imagination? Or access to anything comparable to national security letters ?

If not, I don't see why one snooping can't be much worse than the other.

Knowing how these things generally work

[NotSoHeavyD3]

The ones doing the bullying will be company/school doing the snooping. Then again I am cynical.

pfftt

[djupedal]

This will last until the next suicide happens as a result of overlooked cyber-bullying there, with a lawsuit asking why the consultants missed it. The District will put the burden on the consultants, penalties will force them into bankruptcy and no one will try it ever again.

Or - the consultants will over react, causing too many false alarms and lawsuits for false accusations, with the same effect.

Account info?

[fahrbot-bot]

The district in Glendale, California, is paying $40,500 to a firm to monitor and report on 14,000 middle and high school students' posts on Twitter, Facebook and other social media for one year.

From TFA:

Frydrych's firm scours the social media postings of Glendale students aged 13 and older -- the age at which parental permission isn't required for the school's contracted monitoring -- and sends a daily report to principals on which students' comments could be causes for concern, Frydrych said.

And how does the school district get the student account information? I know if they had asked me for that info (if social media, nay the Internet, existed when I was in HS) I would have replied, "fuck off." Hell, I'd give that same answer to that same question to my employer now.

Re:Account info?

[UnknowingFool]

And how does the school district get the student account information? I know if they had asked me for that info (if social media, nay the Internet, existed when I was in HS) I would have replied, "fuck off." Hell, I'd give that same answer to that same question to my employer now.

If you post on a public site like Facebook where you go to high school, I would say that's fair game for everyone. This isn't like the NSA snooping on private conversations. If you post it in public, you can't then say someone can't read your posts to track you.

Re:Account info?

[hedwards]

Probably the same way that the US Navy got my contact information to harass me when I was in high school. The school just gets authority to collect it and to hell with your wishes. Compared with the years of harassment and insults from the jack asses at the Navy, this is of somewhat lesser concern.

But, it's still a concern, the last thing we need is to condition kids to think that it's normal for schools to spy on your behavior outside of school hours.

Re:Account info?

[Bite The Pillow]

And how does the school district get the student account information?

With $40K and a geo-tag, I could screen-scrape enough facebook and twitter to identify 90 percent of the students who are at any given school (who use social media) given:

1) Any seed account , even the principal or superintendant, or someone else at that school
2) A list of student names - and it gets easier with ages
3) Students often post unfiltered information publically, including the names of their sports teams
4) Students are often not even aware that there is an option to mark things private, or that postings are visible to anyone but their friends
5) Friend or follow lists will be highly correlated with school population, meaning I can spider from every new account
6) A specially crafted mascot account for each school can be used, to friend or follow students susceptible to joining things they don't understand
7) A list of trigger words that flag comments for review by a person
8) A social sciences college student who needs money enough to read the postings of 13 to 18 year olds that have been flagged to see if it should go on a report
9) Another college student interested in sociology or psychology willing to vet and approve the automated matches, and look for more that software missed

Oh man, it goes on. It's quite simple, really, and I for one wish I had thought of offering such a service. The kids don't have to volunteer one bit of information directly to the monitoring company - they will volunteer it all indirectly, unknowingly, and will be very surprised when the school calls mom and dad.

I'd still have most of that $40K, and with a story like this I just upped my client list by an order of magnitude, parental outrage be damned.

Re:Account info?

[ShanghaiBill]

And how does the school district get the student account information?

1. Create a fake account using the picture of a really cute 16 year old girl claiming to be new at the school.
2. Request to friend a few boys. 99% of them will accept.
3. Follow the friends of friends network to connect to everyone else.
In a few days, you should have every student with a Facebook account. My daughter is in high school. She has over 600 Facebook friends, and she will just automatically accept any friend request from any other student at her school. I think this is pretty typical for HS students.

Re:Account info?

[forkazoo]

You can also make accounts using the names of real students for the friend requesting, or completely random ones. Some people won't friend the "Mascott" account, but may approve a request from somebody they think they know. A lot of people won't even notice being friends with two "Steve Smiths," but you could change the name on the account after getting friended pretty quietly to avoid being accidentally contacted as the actual person.

Re:Account info?

[LordLucless]

The students probably have their whole profile and all their posts public. I believe that's the default, and many probably didn't bother changing it. I really have no issue with this, as long as they're only accessing public profiles - if you're publishing information, it's up to you to limit your intended audience.

Re:Account info?

[__aarzwb9394]

Genuine questions from a non-American.

Your military recruits those of school age?

I mean it actively encourages them to join, rather than just under 18s are allowed to join up?

And judging by a previous reply, is legally entitled to contact info for all students?

Re:Account info?

[Savage-Rabbit]

Probably the same way that the US Navy got my contact information to harass me when I was in high school. The school just gets authority to collect it and to hell with your wishes. Compared with the years of harassment and insults from the jack asses at the Navy, this is of somewhat lesser concern.

The US military has been known to procure it's harassment lists from professional private sector list brokers.

But, it's still a concern, the last thing we need is to condition kids to think that it's normal for schools to spy on your behavior outside of school hours.

This is one of those damned if you do damned if you don't situations. You can criticize this all you want and you are right, watching student's social media is plain creepy. However, after the next time some deranged student walks into a school and kills 20+ of his fellow students you will also be able to criticize the school district quite justifiably. After all, this student had been blogging about his intentions on social media for weeks and nobody took any notice. Why weren't the school authorities and law enforcement reading those Facebook posts and doing something about it? I suppose then that the manner and extent of the monitoring would tend to matter. Apparently these guys are using keyword searches of a list of social media accounts to flagtop potentially troubled students for monitoring by professionals (presumably: psychiatrists, ex. cops, ex. social workers). The problem from my POW is not so much the monitoring as what they are searching for. Are they just flagging suicidal students, potentially borderline postal students or bullying victims? Or are they going North Korean on the kids and flagging things that are well within freedom of speech boundaries such as: criticising religion, criticizing the war in Iraq, criticizing the school system or will I be getting calls from the school district because my daughter is blogging about Wiccanism and that offends somebodys christian fundamentalist sensibilities? That would be both wrong and considerably more creepy than just trying to prevent suicides, bullying and shootings. I don't see an easy alternative to this other than doing no monitoring at all in which case you should not criticize the school district if they miss some blog post by a student who then goes off and does something tragic.

Re:Account info?

[Oligonicella]

Otherwise you may end up with school full of drug dealers and prostitutes.

Note the use of the word "may" to justify the snooping.

In the old times every family had a slave

What the fuck world did you grow up in? That is a blatant lie.

Re:Account info?

[Oligonicella]

Schools are currently known to consider expression of religious views as being bullying to others not of their religion. If I were to post on my FB that I thought that Islam was dangerous and should be stomped out, you can bet your ass they could consider that bullying.

Christianity? Not so much.

DIsclaimer: I'm atheist. I criticize all religions.

Re:Account info?

[Mystakaphoros]

Also, from what I remember, one of the Patriot Act provisions was requiring any school that received any federal funding to share any student records with military recruiters.

Re:Account info?

[Kalten]

Alas, yes, and that's been the case for 20+ years. ISTR getting contacts from military recruiters back in the early '90s when I'd never expressed any kind of interest in the US military.

Re:Account info?

[s0nicfreak]

As long as they are not drug dealing and prostituting on school grounds, it is none of the school's business. If, while on school grounds, they have a fight resulting over a drug deal gone bad (off of school grounds) then the school deals with that fight, not the drug deal that went bad.

Re:Private messages, and privacy controls

[hedwards]

That's the thing, if there's actual bullying going on, there's a paper trail of sorts. No need to actually spy, when a kid complains about things being posted to their page, they can just show the principal.

It's a bit of an odd question where exactly the line should be as the bullying these days is more likely to continue past the point of a student being at the same school or even in the same state.

Let's also monitor the teachers and admins

[Anonymous Coward]

Sickening, but welcome to the age of the Surveillance State.

How about if tax dollars were used to follow this district's administrators, teachers and board members?

That is not a rhetorical joke.

How much porn are these "public servants" watching? What are their thoughts? How are they spending their time? Maybe we should do something about it. Let's call a meeting.

Fascist Scumbags.

Re:Let's also monitor the teachers and admins

[fazig]

Besides of wasted tax money, there's a distinct difference.
In your example these "public servants" do things in private and keep them private. But children using Social Media choose to reveal their activities and thoughts to the public, by definition, aren't keeping these things private.
As long as these companies don't 'hack' the Social Media accounts of the children to get access to 'private' information, I don't see the problem. The same thing applies to public servants as well. Anyone can access public information anyway.

This might even reduce cyber-bullying but won't do anything about the cause of bullying itself. It's more of a quick fix to soothe the guilty conscience.

Re:Let's also monitor the teachers and admins

[DarkOx]

The problem is social networks are fundamentally anti-social. Healthy people have normative behavior, that is they adapt to the requirements of the situation; that covers the gambit for sitting posture to what opinions you express and how loudly.

You can say that makes them hypocritical or whatever but its pretty normal and everyone does it. You don't change the opinions you hold at school/the office, but you probably do express them less loudly if at all compared to at the political rally. Trouble is you have one FaceSpace profile that follows you everywhere.

So a student might say in their parents basement to their dearest friend, "god I hate that asshole Ted; he needs a serious ass kicking". This is okay your friend knows if you are serious or not about doing something violent, or just expressing frustration. Some contractor reading your FaceSpace post though is likely to think it bullying or whatever.

Kids and adults for that matter, need a place to blow off steam, so they don't take that rage back to school with them, and so they can conform while there. If the school is going to effectively follow kids home, it's going to creat new problems.

Re:Let's also monitor the teachers and admins

[drinkypoo]

The problem is social networks are fundamentally anti-social

What? Yeah, and the problem with water is that it's dry, and the problem with light is that it's dark. Wait, what?

You don't change the opinions you hold at school/the office, but you probably do express them less loudly if at all compared to at the political rally. Trouble is you have one FaceSpace profile that follows you everywhere.

That's not a problem in cases like this, because these people aren't using back doors. They depend on your post visibility, which you (nominally) control. You're 0 for 2.

Kids and adults for that matter, need a place to blow off steam, so they don't take that rage back to school with them, and so they can conform while there. If the school is going to effectively follow kids home, it's going to creat new problems.

Again, since you control post visibility, this is more like the school watching the kids with binoculars and telescopes from the school roof. What the kids do in public can be seen. If they have the intelligence to hide it just a little bit, it won't show up.

You're 0 for 3, talking complete bullshit.

Re:Let's also monitor the teachers and admins

[DarkOx]

I call social-networks anti social because they distort the way people normally interact. They create what feels like a intimate experience when in fact its all very public.

because these people aren't using back doors. They depend on your post visibility,

Which hardly anybody who isn't interested in the subject of privacy knows how to manage properly; and the options and behavior of the networks changes every few months. Really really easy to get surprised if you don't pay attention.

Also school aged children don't have a whole lot of social experience to begin with; due to in experience they have hard enough time determining what is an is not appropriate and your expectation is that they are able to be thinking about it in abstract ways like interactions of various privacy controls on some website. Good luck there.

Finally kids repeat things. Bobby can read Jane's post, Jane has made sure Gina and School admins can't; but that does not thing to prevent Bobby from posting about Jane's post and stupidly including 99% of its content and a citation.

I am not trying to say "TEH SOCIAL NETWREKS IS EVILS" here but I am saying we should put very little focus and take very little stock in what kids post online.

   

Let the trolling commence!

[Anonymous Coward]

How long before the kids start trolling the hell out of this just for the lulz? The possibilities are endless.
 

Re:Let the trolling commence!

[AHuxley]

Rework some of the "Glorious Leader" texts?
The great school is an outstanding educational and sporting centre, brilliant teachers who teach the capitalist system along the golden road to full employment.

Re:Let the trolling commence!

[cgimusic]

Glorious headmaster demonstrated great strength in our PE class today. He through the shot put over 3 kilometers, a new world record! The capitalist pigs at the Guinness Book of Records won't recognize his claim as they are jealous of his glorious prowess in all areas of education.

I live in Glendale CA.. but not for long.

[jmd]

This does not surprise me. One step out of line in this town..and down you go. I often see a couple of teenaged kids... with 4 cops puffing their chests out. Probably for skateboarding.

You can see the future right here in Glendale CA

Their response to critics

[FuzzNugget]

is that they're doing it for exactly the same reason the government claims to be?

Good!

[NoKaOi]

I see a major positive side effect of this: If students know that school officials are monitoring their social media accounts, then maybe (at lease the brighter ones) will learn to be a little more conscious of the stupid stuff that they post.

Re:Good!

[knorthern knight]

> I see a major positive side effect of this: If students know that school officials
> are monitoring their social media accounts, then maybe (at lease the brighter
> ones) will learn to be a little more conscious of the stupid stuff that they post.

And the really bright ones may decide not to join Facebook/Twitter/whatever. Actually, maybe some good may come out of this after all.

Re:Good!

[s0nicfreak]

Nah, they'll just post that stuff on a site the adults don't know about yet.

They're spending EDUCATION money on THAT?

[MarkvW]

Just when you think that school boards can't get any more stupid and administrator-heavy, somebody comes up with a real whopper.

Re:They're spending EDUCATION money on THAT?

[AHuxley]

If the state or federal gov has cash funding ready to go, better request it or the local staff will lose their grant application writing skills.

Not spying

[manu0601]

This has nothing to do with government spying: everything monitored here is already in public view.

Re:Not spying

[Anonymous Coward]

It's tax dollars spent on 24hr surveillance.

Soaking the taxpayer

[NadNad]

Monitoring about 56% more students costs 8x as much? Gotta love no-bid contracts.

This won't end well

[hyades1]

How long will it take for the students to find out this is going on? My bet is that they already know.

So how long will it be before a student who isn't thrilled with having adults e-stalk them decides to leave a "private" comment about how Principal Lovegood is just a bit too handsy?

Re:This won't end well

[Jeremi]

So how long will it be before a student who isn't thrilled with having adults e-stalk them decides to leave a "private" comment about how Principal Lovegood is just a bit too handsy?

Students have been spreading calumnies like that about their principals and teachers since before there was Internet access... I don't think anything would be different now.

OTOH the knowledge that there are adults (virtually) present might well be enough to prevent the Lord of the Flies scenario that seems to play out too often these days.

Re:This won't end well

[Belial6]

We have a winner!

Re:This won't end well

[hyades1]

The situations aren't even remotely the same. Do I really have to explain why, or can you work it out for yourself?

Teensy hint: consider the difference between publicly accusing a teacher of sexual misconduct and telling a friend "privately", along with something like, "And if anybody tries to make me tell, I'll just deny everything".

What's a poor eavesdropper to do?

Re:This won't end well

[anonymov]

Teensy hint: RTFA

"I find it interesting that people keep asking if we're doing something illegal or snooping or eavesdropping, but what we're actually doing is looking at public posts," Frydrych said. "We don't see any private posts."

It's not just "publicly accusing a teacher", it's "publicly accusing a teacher, with _all_ your friends and relatives there to hear it and eternal record remaining".

Re:This won't end well

[bickerdyke]

How long will it take for the students to find out this is going on?

Well, it's on the news. What more is there to "find out"?

Re:This won't end well

[hyades1]

From TFA: "People say that's not private: It's public on Facebook. I say that's just semantics. The question is what is the school doing? It's not stumbling into students -- like a teacher running across a student on the street. This is the school sending someone to watch them..."

And anybody who believes even for a second the company doesn't go deeper than they admit to going is probably ready to take advantage of that amazing opportunity extended by a Nigerian bank president.

Re:This won't end well

[anonymov]

Which part of "public on Facebook" did you miss and where did you read about phenomenal hackers and deep NSA connections of the monitoring firm?

People are arguing - and I tend to agree - that it's not school's business reading public FB walls, just like it's not school's business to send people to watch over playground and sit in cafes behind their students. It's public, physically and legally, point of dissent is ethical.

Re:This won't end well

[sociocapitalist]

How long will it take for the students to find out this is going on? My bet is that they already know.

So how long will it be before a student who isn't thrilled with having adults e-stalk them decides to leave a "private" comment about how Principal Lovegood is just a bit too handsy?

Brilliant :-)

Re:This won't end well

[Reziac]

Not to mention that in today's paranoid climate, any such accusation will be automatically believed, with all the negative potential that generates, up to and including a wrongful conviction and jail time for some innocent teacher.

I'm sure kids will very quickly learn to use this against whomever displeases them.

What a great idea!

[grasshoppa]

All kids should have adults looking out for them, helping them grow into successful adults.

This is truly an idea who's time has come.

blame 'budget cuts'

[globaljustin]

The schools have been driven to this

By entrepreneurs eager to cash-in on wealthy school districts and the helicopter parents.

This is privacy invasion plain and simple.

I used to be a high school social studies teacher. *EVERY* problem in the classroom is solvable with a properly trained and experienced teacher.

You can blame all you want but in a capitalist society if you pay teachers like union bus drivers you are going to get what you pay for...teachers will still come but they won't stay...paying teachers poorly just burns out idealistic, well-prepared teachers.

capitalism = you get what you pay teachers

that's the end of this whole discussion...

Re:blame 'budget cuts'

[Jeremi]

*EVERY* problem in the classroom is solvable with a properly trained and experienced teacher.

Great, but this problem is happening outside the classroom.

Re:blame 'budget cuts'

[globaljustin]

*EVERY* problem in the classroom is solvable with a properly trained and experienced teacher.

Great, but this problem is happening outside the classroom.

no, every school-related problem is solvable in school by a properly trained teacher...

to falsify my point, if a kid was getting bullied by neighborhood kids who don't attend his school and they don't have bruises or speak up to a teacher about it then yes that would be a scenario that wouldn't be solvable by the teacher...

what you people have to understand is that teachers (and probation officers) are the catch-alls of our society...you **wouldn't believe** the problems a standard public school teacher is expected and trained to handle unless you've worked in the system

the thing is, the training works but the teachers get burt out

Re:blame 'budget cuts'

[Sique]

I doubt that. For instance, my son goes to school via public transport, and now the new term has started, and on his normal bus station there were children waiting whom he knew from his short time in a soccer club. And they started to harass him because of him leaving the club again so soon. And no, they don't go to the same school as him, they just use the same bus, as it is the main bus line downtown.

I don't know how a teacher will solve this, though it is definitely school related.

Re:blame 'budget cuts'

[pspahn]

In my case, properly trained means a four hour session twice a year practicing CPI, along with using the methods it speaks of daily.

It's easy for you to sit on the sidelines and call someone out for a meaningless capitalization typo, isn't it? In fact, in a discussion about bullying, you decide the best thing to add is more bullying.

And people wonder where these kids learn it from...

Re:blame 'budget cuts'

[pspahn]

A teacher handles that problem by teaching the kid how to handle the situation themselves. Novel concept, huh?

Of course, that's really a parent's job, so putting the expectation on a teacher to raise your kid properly seems unfair.

Re:blame 'budget cuts'

[Sique]

I know how to handle the situation, I was just doubting that a teacher, as well educated he might be, can solve any school related problem and cited an example from my personal experience where I knew that the teacher would be the wrong person to ask.

Re:blame 'budget cuts'

[TWiTfan]

And if they're going to hire a firm to monitor student online social activities, they got ripped off at $40,500. Creepy Larry would have done it for free.

Re:blame 'budget cuts'

[EzInKy]

I guess it also == you get what you pay bus drivers? Seriously, is a child more likely during to get injured on a moving vehicle or parked in classroom?

Re:blame 'budget cuts'

[bluegutang]

I used to be a high school social studies teacher. *EVERY* problem in the classroom is solvable with a properly trained and experienced teacher.

No true Scotsman^W^W properly trained teacher would be unable to solve a problem in the classroom.

Re:blame 'budget cuts'

[Mystakaphoros]

Creepy Larry would have done it for free.

He offered me his card, but I didn't want to take it out of his front pocket.

Re:blame 'budget cuts'

[Mystakaphoros]

You get what you pay *everyone*.

Teachers aren't a special category. I'm underpaid too. Blame the guy making $500billion and the congressman who kisses up to him - and when you go to blame him, take all your underpaid brethren with you - not just other teachers. Pay stagnates because people march for their own special industries instead of grouping together and demanding change for everyone. I'm sure you know this as a social studies teacher.

Now if only we had one big union... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Industrial_Workers_of_the_World

Re:blame 'budget cuts'

[dcw3]

The schools have been driven to this

By lawyers, and a lawsuit happy public.

FTFY

Re:blame 'budget cuts'

[XcepticZP]

By entrepreneurs eager to cash-in on wealthy school districts and the helicopter parents.

It's funny what kind of useless nonsense get's funded when people have free reign to spend other peoples' money.

capitalism = you get what you pay teachers

Lol, you think you have capitalism. It's no wonder that kids come out of public school in america the way they do. I hope you stick to your subject, instead of imparting your biased political and economic views on impressionable young minds. If that's not the case then shame on you.

Re:blame 'budget cuts'

[anyGould]

Let's face facts - "bullying" is a bit of a BS term anyway. Once you get out into the real world "gimme your money or I'm gonna hit you" is robbery (up to nine years in California). You haven't been bullied, you've been mugged.

Teasing and all that? You try that in your workplace and let us know how long before HR wants a few words with you. If you won't put up with it in your workplace, why do you expect your kids to put up with it in theirs?

Re:blame 'budget cuts'

[Hognoxious]

Depends on the type of teacher. If it's the kind also referred to as a sensei it might be different.

Post a gun ... get an inquiry

[Caladrius]

FROM TFA:
In another recent incident, a student posted a photo of what appeared to be a gun, and a subsequent inquiry determined the gun was fake, Sheehan said. Still, school administrators spoke with the parents of the student, who wasn't disciplined, the superintendent said. "We had to educate the student on the dangers" of posting such photos, Sheehan said. "He was a good kid. ... It had a good ending."

Errr ... so ... if it had not been a fake gun, then he'd have been ??? What if he is a hunter? Likes to shoot targets with a bb gun? Had posted a picture of his dad cleaning a legally owned handgun?? You know they'd have done something - otherwise, if he shows up and shoots ppl they'd be crucified by lawsuits.

It is now dangerous to post completely legal things .. this won't end well.

Re:Post a gun ... get an inquiry

[AHuxley]

Think of the next step.
If any parent makes a fuss about Constitutional rights they are showing signs of PTSD. Welcome to the medical no buy list.

Re:Private messages, and privacy controls

[bickerdyke]

It's the PUBLIC bullying and defamation that's problematic. if mullying would consist only of private messages, it could easily be blocked. The problem is the false, but public facebook profile that tells everyone what you like to do with sheep and dolphins.

And $40k wouldn't even hire an single, additional teacher, so much for "nice ressources".

Re:Goose and Gander

[bickerdyke]

The point of Reputation monitoring is to find out, what "information" about you (or the monitored subject) IS already public. So posting such results would be of no use. That kind of monitoring is desigend to find that public page that already everyone but you knows about and to explain why everyone is calling you names like "sheep lover" when you walk down the hall.

Stalking is still a crime

[cstec]

Though critics liken the monitoring to government stalking, school officials and their contractor say the purpose is student safety.

If "safety" is created by stalking, the price is too high.

I hope the students

[DarkOx]

Hopeful some of the older students will conspire to troll the fuck out of the watchers.

Re:I hope the students

[Oligonicella]

To make this truly effective, post a disclaimer one month before you start doing it.

Re:Private messages, and privacy controls

[cgimusic]

And publicly bullying someone online can be done completely anonymously. What exactly does wasting 40k solve?

What a horrible job

[Danathar]

I'd shoot myself if I had to forcibly read HS facebook posts all day...

Absolutely correct!

[EzInKy]

If they could have done something and didn't, they will at the very least be held negligent for not performing due diligence.

Busy monitoring nothing

[jjdacl]

Surely any mildly tech savvy student has locked down the security settings on their facebook account so that non-friends can't see anything?

Re:Can't we agree already...

[Oligonicella]

Apparently Shakespeare was a little shortsighted. He only wanted to hang lawyers.

No break from Social Media

[Anonymous Coward]

BOE member, husband of School Superintendent here.

The schools are in a real hard place with regards to social media. Instagram is being used to determine social status.

# Followers >> # Following = cool kid. Plus who "likes" your post vs not.

A lot happens off school property and off school time, but the school is the nexus. I am a fiscal and social libertarian, but honesty I find myself day dreaming, "if only the government would out law social media....."

Used to be we got a break from school at home and on the weekends, this crap follows the kids home, 24/7. All these posts saying, my life is great yours sucks. The local fair had open wifi, why? So all the kids posting pics of how much fun they were having would drive the kids at home to bug the life out of their parents to bring them to the fair. Extortion, pure and simple. Extortion is a big part of social media and frankly I am sick and tired of being manipulated by it.

And yes, we see girls posting about cutting.

so you agree with me then?

[globaljustin]

And no, they don't go to the same school as him, they just use the same bus, as it is the main bus line downtown.

I don't know how a teacher will solve this, though it is definitely school related.

you **litterally** described the very scenario I described, in the post you replied to, that I gave that would falsify my statement...here it is again for you

to falsify my point, if a kid was getting bullied by neighborhood kids who don't attend his school and they don't have bruises or speak up to a teacher about it then yes that would be a scenario that wouldn't be solvable by the teacher...

so you agree with me, that YES any problem in school is solvable by a teacher...and you agree with how I falsify the statement...

yet your post is worded as if you disagree...