My Board

[url="http://techdirt.com/articles/20051108/0055200_F.shtml"][u]School Pays Up To Student Who Was Suspended Over His Web Site[/u][/url]
A couple weeks ago, the net was buzzing with the story of a high school in New Jersey that was banning all blogging activity, claiming that this was necessary to protect the kids. Perhaps the folks at that school should take a look at the news coming out today in their home state. Two years ago, a New Jersey middle school suspended a kid for his website, which criticized the school. The student fought back, claiming his right to free speech was violated, since he had built the website completely outside of school. Now, the school has decided to settle the case and pay out $117,500 to the student for his troubles. While the school that banned blogging is a private Catholic school, which makes the case much less clear, you can bet some of the students at the school might be emboldened by this result to challenge the blogging ban (and maybe pay for some college tuition at the same time).

----------------------------------------------------------


What are your views? Do you think that schools should ban blogging/websites?

I don\'t see how schools have any rights to ban their students from blogging. It\'s the student\'s right to free speech...how can they take it away?

Its ironic that certain schools are banning blogging, while my computing teachers wouldn\'t know what blogging was.

I think that in reality, many of the school administrators are afraid of the new technology, they pay more attention to the "horror" stories of the net (runaways, pedos, conmen) and fail to embrace the possibilities of the technology. Often fear is born of ignorance, and school administrations either haven\'t taken the time to learn, or they are terrified of ending up with some huge lawsuit against them because some parent feels the school didn\'t protect the child.

Many schools are missing educational opportunities because they use the knee-jerk instaban reaction instead of taking the time to consult, listen and learn. Blogging can be used as a learning tool, the same as many other areas of the internet and computing. Blogging could even become a term project, and for some students it might even get them interested in subjects like English. Blogging could be an entertaining way for students in the family classes to write about their experiences with the lifelike babies.

Some people would say "what\'s wrong with a notebook and pen"...well...nothing, but if you make things fun to learn and fun to work on, schools might find students taking more interest and actually caring about their classes. Besides-they should look at using the new technology as a way of preparing students for the future.

[quote]the school that banned blogging is a private Catholic school[/quote]

Maybe their just scared that the student might post [i]something that they shouldnt[/i]


[size=1][i]*Edit by Endophyte: Sorry turtleman, although I agree with freedom of speech, this doesnt pass in my books; we may have Catholic members, or other members, who may find that derrogatory in some way[/size][/i]

[quote name=\'Dren\' post=\'30043\' date=\'Nov 8 2005, 11:52 PM\'][url="http://techdirt.com/articles/20051108/0055200_F.shtml"][u]School Pays Up To Student Who Was Suspended Over His Web Site[/u][/url]
A couple weeks ago, the net was buzzing with the story of a high school in New Jersey that was banning all blogging activity, claiming that this was necessary to protect the kids. Perhaps the folks at that school should take a look at the news coming out today in their home state. Two years ago, a New Jersey middle school suspended a kid for his website, which criticized the school. The student fought back, claiming his right to free speech was violated, since he had built the website completely outside of school. Now, the school has decided to settle the case and pay out $117,500 to the student for his troubles. While the school that banned blogging is a private Catholic school, which makes the case much less clear, you can bet some of the students at the school might be emboldened by this result to challenge the blogging ban (and maybe pay for some college tuition at the same time).

----------------------------------------------------------
What are your views? Do you think that schools should ban blogging/websites?[/quote]


Well at the beginning of this year I was partially in some strife because I started up a petition to "Save North Canteen". This was back when it was selling "healthy" food, and therefore not making a single dollar from the sane student population. Eventually I got to talk with the principal of the North school and she said if I didn't take it down she'd suspend me. In hindsight, now I should have left it up and got that $117,500. And also on my website I have criticised the school.

Schools should teach students that putting information online about themselves and/or their friends is not a good thing to do. Giving away your location was one of the things I was first told not to do, yet I see a lot of people still doing it. Freedom of speech is a priviledge. Would you rather live in North Korea where you say "Kim Jong Il sucks <insert part of anatomy here>" and get killed? I didn't think so.

[quote]Freedom of speech is a priviledge.[/quote]


Sorry... Freedom of speech is a [b]RIGHT!![/b].

and allot of vets gave there life so others have that Right... Other countries dont have that same right, simply because they didnt have a revolution and overcame a dictorial Goverment so they could have the "Rights" we enjoy..
Point is.. that person made the website/blog on their own time, they have every Right to post, name, say anything they want on it!!.. and when some dinky public servant tells them they cant... STAND UP FOR YOUR "RIGHT!",,, the same way that one student did.. clearly the courts agreed with the student and the students RIghts!

I dont really see it as a major issue; schools have the right to block websites on their intranet. Although I see it as somewhat injust that the school feels they have to ban blogging to the protect the children, to me it would be the same as blacklisting harmful websites. If this school was anything like mine, many websites are blacklisted purely because they have the internet accessible to anyone for school work, not email/blogging/games etc.

Coming from a Catholic school, who yes, does have blacklisted sites (eg. most email websites, Hotmail, Yahoo) I cant see how this happening at a Catholic school makes it more unclear why it was done. Im not saying anyone on this thread implied this; but just because its a Catholic school, does not mean the students at that school have full on strong christian beliefs; anyone has the potential to ruin a privelege for a school regaurdless of their religion.

[color="green"][quote name=\'Scott\']...while my computing teachers wouldn\'t know what blogging was.[/quote]

most of the teachers at my school wouldnt... not just the computer ones /blum.gif\' class=\'bbc_emoticon\' alt=\':P\' />

im not entirely sure that we are getting -ALL- of the facts with this article either... [/color]

[url="http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2005/10/27/75210.shtml"]N.J. School Orders Blog Removal[/url] is the actual story for the banning of the blogs. In reading this article i retract much of my previous post; this is the school actually \'making\' the students remove their blogs off the internet reguardless of where the blog was made. To me this is a violation of freedom of speech, though the school views it as protecting their students from communicating with internet randoms. The school wasnt \'urging\' students to, but more so telling them to which isnt right, they have no controll over students personal lives, nor should they even try to. What the school should have done is made parents more aware of the dangers and educate them on what the worst case scenario could be.

[b][i][color="gray"][font="tahoma"]I think it's fair enough to block students from accessing blogs, emails or other things on school computers. I think the school has a right to block any website they see fit on their own computers, because thats exactly what they are, they are their computers and the students are using them as a privelege.

But schools have no right what so ever to tell a person what they can and can't do outside of their school life. Let's say you go to "Obviously Fake High School" and you post on your personal website "Obviously Fake High School Sucks", thats your prerogative. Blogging can also help students to relieve stress, tension, anger and other emotions with the chances of someone getting emotionally or physically harmed as a result are close to none. Better to let a student vent their anger towards a person on their website than vent their anger on their face... [/b][/i][/color][/font]

Have to agree with mobes on this one. A school has the right to tell the students what they can or can\'t do on the computers used at school. We have to sign a paper which tells that we won\'t do any illegal things on the computers ( i know blogging or so ist\'n illegal but still ). The school let\'s the students use their computers and can therefore demand that they are only used for educational stuff, which means the students have to do the blodding and so at home. If a student shouldn\'t have any internet or so at home he/she can alwasy go to an internet cafe to do the desired things.

/bigwink.gif\' class=\'bbc_emoticon\' alt=\';)\' />

Yes, I agree that they can restrict what their computer\'s are used for, but actually ordering their students to take down blogs which the school does not control is against the students\' rights.

Agree\'d.

[font="Tahoma"]Really, I'm a tad conflicted in this matter. Some students will disclose personal information about other students on their blogs (full names, addresses, and the likes) without understanding that their blog can accessed by [i]x[/i] amount of users on the Internet (not including Spider Bots looking for snail mail to send spam to). There are alot of concerns when it comes to online blogs made by students of any school; not just private/catholic ones. Would any of you like your friend to post something like your AIM Screenname, or your MSN e-mail for everyone/anything to get ahold of? Or even more so, what about your real life address? or hangouts? Yes, stalkers do pop around on the Internet quite a bit - so it's not as though it's an unfathomable thing.

I agree that school administration does freak out a little too much in regards to things like pedophiles, stalkers, and such; but they're meant to. Just like most parents do, they're meant to make sure that their kids don't get wrapped up into something that they'd regret. If my guardians stopped me from getting into some of the things I have when I was a little boy, I probably wouldn't have such a twisted dark side on the Internet (which is done and over with, but the point was - I went through it). Not only that, when I was 15 - I had a stalker irl because I met someone online that was somewhat local to where I was at that time. Boy, was that a huge mess.

I could counter my own arguement, so there's not much point in doing so. I know that there are rights that a citizen of most countries in the world may have; but they still don't have the right to post private information concerning other people that haven't given their concent. Regardless of how much of a friend they are to said blogger. [/font]

David has some good points. /ohmy.gif\' class=\'bbc_emoticon\' alt=\':o\' />

I agree with your points, David and yes those are major concerns - I know that the internet can become a very scary place, but again it\'s up to the parents to educate their children. Some of Mike\'s friends have been read the riot act in regards to what is permitted and what is not if they use his computer; one is no longer welcome in this house because of his misuse of Mike\'s computer. I think that while some unwittingly give out too much information, those who post spiteful things about their friends because of an argument, or about those they simply dislike would do so in another venue if they didn\'t have internet. Writing things in bathrooms, on buildings, lockers-that is something they would do anyway simply because of the motivation behind it. Again, it is situations such as those that need to be dealt with by parents, guardians, and in some cases the law.

[font="Tahoma"]Agreed, although you have to look at it from this point of view in regards to the school systems: while your child is within their walls, they're responsible for them. Their actions can inflict negative or positive attention towards the school that they attend. An example would be Columbine, what is it known for? The first real act of school violence. Is that something you'd like Mike's school to be known for? (it's rhetorical, I know the answer is no). Now what would had happened if, hypothetically, one of Mike's classmates become extremely irritated, frustrated, annoyed, or angered by him to the point of posting as much information about him online as possible? Home Address, Phone Number, Your License Plate Number, Private information, etc... (since it's hypothetical, make sure you don't look at it as your own self, seeing as you're more than capable of handling these types of situations - that most parents are not). That's why schools freak out about certain things.

While at the same time, usage of computers at home are to be dealt with by parents/guardians/law enforcement if necessary. However, the information that was posted was obtained in school. In small rural areas, that means..quite a lot. Or even in larger communities, that could still make or break a school in terms of trust towards the staff members and so forth (inability to see possible threats/adversity amongst students). In the end, it's really a group effort between the school system, parents/guardians, and (if absolutely necessary) the law enforcers. [/font]

Oh, I\'m not disagreeing with you; I fully agree that schools should have the right to regulate what is accessed from school. At the beginning of the school year, parents and students have to sign a Terms of Use agreement or they are not permitted to access the internet while at school.

If many of the warning signs in regards to Columbine had not been ignored, or those who suspected what was going on had spoken up, then perhaps...just perhaps...the tragedies could have been diffused. Of course, we could also point a finger or two at the American gun laws (no, I am not anti-firearms) and the ease of access. Yes, I know-if someone wants a gun or ammunition they can get it, the same as with internet access, the same with slandering someone or posting personal information.

It is, as you said, ultimately in the hands of those responsible for the students-parents, teachers, and ultimately law enforcement. I do feel, however, that parents rely far too much on others (such as teachers) and on technology to keep their children occupied. It started with the baby-boomers when it was discovered what a great babysitter the television made. Now those same kids who were raised with a tv for a companion are raising a stink about violence in games and on tv, along with all kinds of other content. Are they wrong for caring? No, not really-but that said, I think that it all comes back to the principals and morals we raise our children with and the quality time we spend with them. Like every parent before us, all we can really do is try our best in raising our children.

[font="Tahoma"]Yep, that's the reality of it all. I don't really blame the school for imposing a ban on blogging by students; harsh, but it does make sense. If that rule stretched out to one's personal (physical) journal/diary, then I'd be a bit more imposed against it. But, under the circumstance that it's for blogging online; a part of me feels that it's acceptable. And yeah, parents have relied too much on "the system" to take care of their children. Babysitters/Nursery, School, Technology are the big three that parents try to push their children off to. Sometimes Nursery's necessary (as they have trained people for certain development problems), but otherwise, it's not needed. Problem is, some people just don't know how to keep up with work + family without lacking in one of them. Thus, the dependancy. [/font]

Now wait a minute...."sometimes Nursery\'s necessary"....what if you\'re a single parent and you HAVE to work? Our social assistance system *requires* single moms to work once their children reach a certain age. What are they supposed to do with those children until they reach school age? Many other moms are not involved with social services and work hard to support themselves and their offspring and need daycare. In my opionion, daycare is no worse than a child spending all day in school. It\'s the hours outside of work/school times which are spent with one\'s child that matter.

[font="Tahoma"]That's what I meant though. There are financial situations whereas nursery is acceptable by all means. But, you have to understand that there are some parents who actually ship their kids off to nursery just because they don't want to deal with them for 8-9 hours a day so they can peacefully watch their soap operas. In the UK, the government does assessments of children (under the age of five) to check how well they're developing. Speech and such can be taught in a nursery, paid for the government here. But by all means, if you're in a household where you're an already "at home parent", why should you put them in the nursery for 8-9 hours a day? [/font]

Under those circumstances I quite agree; if nursery school can help with disabilities then that\'s a good thing, plus in some cases would give the mom and/or dad a break they might not otherwise get. However in the case of people just shipping their child off while they stay at home, then no I can\'t agree with that. If I\'d had the opportunity to be a stay at home mom, I would have grabbed it fast. I missed out on lots of things at school and in Mike\'s younger years because I had to work. At least I was there when he started talking and walking....ohhhh how I rue those days LMAO /bigwink.gif\' class=\'bbc_emoticon\' alt=\';)\' />