The Virginia Board of Education is proposing new guidelines that suggest that local school boards should ban teachers from interacting with students via social networks or personal cell phones. Specifically the proposed regulation says, "Teachers...may not use personal wireless communications devices to "text" students and are prohibited from interacting with students through online social-networking sites."
They also recommend that teachers be required to decline or disregard invitations from students to interact via texting or social-networking sites. I also found it interesting that the proposals specifically listed a ban on teachers knowingly engaging with students in online gaming.
The quick summary of the proposals can be found here and here is the link to the official proposal.
The proposal is just a component of a greater set of regulations on preventing sexual misconduct between teachers and students. While I agree that more should be done to protect students, these outright bans raise some interesting first amendment issues.
Personally, I am disappointed in the professionalism of those teachers who have done things that now warrant the issuing of a proposal like this one.
Where does one draw the line? I made a personal decision as a teacher not to friend any of my students until they were no longer my students. Yet those individuals are still students in the division that I work for. How would that fit in with these current regulations? What about a parent who works for the schools and has school aged children? Would they be prevented from connecting with friends of their child on social networking sites?
I know of teachers who have friended students on Facebook or played online video games with current students with no harm coming from either of those situations. While I would never do either of those actions because I believe it is unprofessional, I am not convinced those actions are so egregious that they need to be banned.
This is a tough one. Where do you stand?
Dear Tom,
ReplyDeleteYou present an interesting dilemma. I think there are a lot of other facts that are important to consider. For example, I believe there is greater concern for such social 'friending' in an elementary child versus a high school child-or even a college student. These social networking sites, although I believe are demeaning to the rich experiences of personal interaction, seem to be the new wave of the future. There are a lot of kids who are 'lost' and needing guidance, which they may get from 'friends' that are not of such high caliber as many teachers. I say many teachers, because there are those that are not quality people even though they may be qualified to teach (i.e. have the degree or education experience necessary). I do believe there needs to be a barrier, whether you call it a professional barrier or a barrier whereby the teacher retains their role within the teacher-student relationship. I think this is similar to the question about whether as a parent your primary role is as parent or friend and what things you must do to ensure your role is defined so that your child respects you as the authority figure you many times need to be. That is not to say you should not be 'friends', but the relationship evolves into that as the child or in this case, the student matures into adulthood.
As for the outright ban on such 'friending' it may seem like an extreme, a throwing out of the baby with the bath water. However, many of these social networking sites are difficult for the parents, especially those lets tech savvy, to monitor. Most students have a built in trust relationship with their teachers because of their roles and this may cause a sort of reliance on teachers, giving teachers certain power over the students. A devious teacher who has this trust relationship with the student child can be very harmful for a child. This may lead to damaged relationships with parents, peers or even damaged children who are easier victims of predatory abuse (i.e. emotion or sexual). An outright ban is easier to monitor because any contact could be a red-flag. We definitely have become a paranoid society where everyone fears they must lock their doors and protect their children from the world outside. For example, an outright ban on certain drugs or alcohol up to a certain age because of the potential for addiction and the potential for harmful side-effects to the user and society.
Think about alternatives to prevent such dangers. There is no fool-proof way to ensure one's child's safety completely, but this is a way to show that the parent-figure needs to be the dominant social authority in a child's life.
The first amendment allows for 'time-place-and manner' restrictions (for example: you cannot become a nuisance - restrict traffic, become violent or take advantage of a hostage crowd). There may be some arguments to be made, but the first amendment was written long before anyone used facebook or texted another so it's hard to know what may have been intended under such circumstances.
As a parent, I would be a little wary of an adult wanting to friend my young child, but I think if the teacher has the parents blessing that should alleviate the ban, because it allows the parent to ensure their primary role over the teacher and builds in the natural protection for the child. In today's society education is essentially compulsory, which means we should have certain safeguards as parents to monitor the potential dangers presented by these relationships. To sum up, the ban does not seem ill-formed, but the parents should be permitted to OK such contact if they deem it safe and beneficial for their children. Peace out - a father of three.