Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

IL School District to Monitor Student Blogs

Posted by CowboyNeal on Thu May 25, 2006 06:48 PM
from the teaching-grammar-and-ethics dept.
tinkertim writes "According to a Yahoo article, a school district in Libertyville, IL will be holding students accountable for illegal actions discussed in their MySpace blogs even if such actions in no way involved the school or another student. A spokesperson for the school district was quoted as saying: 'The concept that searching a blog site is an invasion of privacy is almost an oxymoron,' he said. 'It is called the World Wide Web.' Supposedly, no direct monitoring or snooping will be done unless the school receives a report from a concerned parent, community member or other student."
+ -
story
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.
  • by linvir (970218) * on Thursday May 25 2006, @06:49PM (#15406168)
    Important context missing from summary: students have to submit to this as a pledge, and it's compulsory for all students wishing to participate in extra curricular activities. It's no less ridiculous for that, but it's still an important detail because it's not as generalised as it sounds here on Slashdot. Back to the flaming...
    The concept that searching a blog site is an invasion of privacy is almost an oxymoron
    Well, congratulations Captain Obvious, you've successfully defended yourself against a point that nobody had made. Now if you could just deal with the concern that the school district is overstepping its bounds and attempting to exercise too much control over kids' lives, we might have some sort of discussion on our hands.

    The ambiguity of the criteria doesn't help either: 'Illegal' is one thing, but 'inappropriate' is another one they use (though not mentioned in the summary) and more or less gives them a license to discipline (oh, but only after some undisclosable anonymous source expresses 'concern', of course). I'm willing to bet that illegal means mostly slander against school employees, and inappropriate is 'anything else we don't like and can use as dirt against a kid we want to get rid of'.

    "I don't think they need to police what students are doing online," she said. "That's my job."
    Given that most of the time, it's parental apathy being compensated for by the authorities, it's very telling that in this case parents are demanding to be given back their control.
    • by Anonymous Coward
      So if my kid has something to say about his school, I'll help him write it and I'll post it on MY blog. Then the school can deal with me, instead of picking on a kid.
    • more or less gives them a license to discipline (oh, but only after some undisclosable anonymous source expresses 'concern', of course)

      I know how this feels first hand. In the 6th grade my parents sent me and my two younger sisters to a private school. The Dean was pretty strict, but we were getting a good education, a lot of individual teacher attention and really exceeding in our studies. The second year the Dean decided that we (the students, not just me and my siblings) were rebels that needed to be

  • The real oxymoron (Score:5, Insightful)

    by ChrisBennett (18205) on Thursday May 25 2006, @06:50PM (#15406173)
    Libertyville? Yeah- right.
  • by jbrader (697703) <jbrader@gmail.com> on Thursday May 25 2006, @06:51PM (#15406176)
    If we're going to become a 1984 style police state it makes sence to start with the young people.
  • by quincunx55555 (969721) on Thursday May 25 2006, @06:52PM (#15406180)
    ...of law enforcement. Shall we have our police officers teaching and managing our schools now? I can't even fathom why a school would want to take on this responsibility. I bet that if this keeps up, a few years down the road parents are going to be yelling at the schools for not catching Jonny's 'illegal' blog. What a mess. Now only if the parents would make the same committment!
  • by DragonWriter (970822) on Thursday May 25 2006, @06:53PM (#15406183)
    ...they have increased the likelihood that people will try to hold them responsible, and more likely that they will be succesful in doing so. Stupid move. Maybe they should spend more effort dealing with the things they are already, by law, clearly responsible for, and tell people that won't to report apparently illegal things that have nothing to do with the school that they infer from someone's blog postings to call the appropriate law enforcement agency.

    Because school districts aren't equipped or funded to act as general law enforcement agencies, and have more than enough demands on their resources doing what they are supposed to do, without their staff trying to live out their "Internet cop" fantasies.
  • by way2trivial (601132) on Thursday May 25 2006, @06:55PM (#15406189) Homepage Journal
    let's say I have a blog, and claim I stole a diamond ring from my neighbor in my blog.

    what exactly is the school going to do, that they are going to hold me accountable for what I write in my blog..

    arrest me? press charges as an educatorial influence?

    • A wild guess... (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Ungrounded Lightning (62228) on Thursday May 25 2006, @07:32PM (#15406339) Journal
      Here's a wild guess:

      Kick you off the teams (and other extra activities that look good on college admission forms). Kick you out of AP classes. Suspend or expell you. Put black marks in your record (and otherwise interfere with earning decent grades) that will blight your carreer and reduce your earning and marriage prospects for the rest of your life.
    • This might actually be a nice way to completely invalidate this crap, if you don't mind a bumpy ride for a while. Essentially they're acting as the police, jury, and executioner if they decide, without any evidence or verification that what you've said is true. This could put them in a very embarassing legal jam.
  • by overshoot (39700) on Thursday May 25 2006, @06:56PM (#15406192)
    The first student to post totally fictitious accounts of something "objectionable" will be up.

    Should be no end of fun for the kids, and I rather suspect that the first several lawyers' fees will end up paid by the district too.

    • Considering that probaly almost half the thirteen year old Tammies on 13-yo IRC chat channels are really Big-assed-Burt, truck driver from IL, how long before BaB starts making up ficticious blogs that get real Tammies into trouble.
    • The first student to post totally fictitious accounts of something "objectionable" will be up.

      Should be no end of fun for the kids, and I rather suspect that the first several lawyers' fees will end up paid by the district too.

      Indeed... If I was in the school district, I would start a blog, just so I could tell the story of how I used my army of robots to nuke New Tokyo, or something. Then, I would post that I shot Kennedy using my time machine. Then, I would post that I had a glass of wine. I'd love to

  • by rpdillon (715137) * on Thursday May 25 2006, @06:58PM (#15406200) Homepage
    This is yet another step towards government-as-parent. Since when is it the school's job (as a government funded organization) to police students' activities when they are not on school property, and are not engaged in activities related to the school? Further, just because someone writes something in a blog does not mean it is true. Keywords: "Waste of resources".

    This is a perversion of what schools should actually be focusing on. Why not focus on teaching students how to perform basic life skills, like manage credit, get a bank account, balance a checkbook, and spot shady deals when trying to buy a car? At least that would fall under "education", not "parenting" (although parents should be teaching their children all that as well).
    • Because for many people schools aren't about education, they are about control. Obviously not everybody feels this way, but apparently there are enough that do for us to see these news stories every week. Companies, churches, and the government demonstrate exactly the same tendencies, but they are kept in check by adults who won't put up with that crap. Adolescents are in a worse position, and are not used to asserting their rights. Maybe it's a form of education after all.
  • Impersonation (Score:4, Interesting)

    by assassinator42 (844848) on Thursday May 25 2006, @07:00PM (#15406206)
    What if someone didn't like a particular student, created a blog claiming to be them, and posted illegal or inappropriate material? The same thing goes for employers checking out potential employees. There's no way to verify people are who they say they are on these sites.
  • by thecitruskid (468923) on Thursday May 25 2006, @07:01PM (#15406217)
    "The board of Community High School District 128 voted unanimously on Monday to require that all students participating in extracurricular activities sign a pledge agreeing that evidence of "illegal or inappropriate" behavior posted on the Internet could be grounds for disciplinary action."

    Clearly this school is just preparing its students for the America of tomorrow.
  • Now wait a minute. (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Puls4r (724907) on Thursday May 25 2006, @07:02PM (#15406219)
    Last time I checked, we have agencies for handling illegal activities. I believe they are called "police".....

    Since when does a school have the time or resources to monitor this type of thing? Sure, sure, if they get notified and see it on the web page, report it to be the police. But last time I checked every person in this country is allowed "Due Process" before being sentenced for any type of crime, and last time I checked it is NOT the schools that are allowed to levy a sentence prior to a court of law.

    Overstepping their bounds? WAY overstepping their bounds my friends.
  • Circling Sharks (Score:3, Insightful)

    by headkase (533448) <pickett.bill@gmail.com> on Thursday May 25 2006, @07:13PM (#15406276)
    ... I smell a lawsuit! ... Yeah, a big one - at least six figures ... ;)
  • by TekPolitik (147802) on Thursday May 25 2006, @08:06PM (#15406515) Journal
    It can still be an invasion of privacy to be monitoring blogs depending on what the purpose is in doing the monitoring. Privacy is not just about secrecy - secrecy is merely one facet of privacy, and is not even the most important one. Privacy is a much broader concept and is about being left the hell alone. The monitoring in this case appears to be planned for the purpose of the school district systematically interfering in stuff that is none of their damned business, and so it can still be an invasion of privacy even though the information being monitored is publicly available.

    There's no oxymoron, but it's clear the spokesperson is a moron.

    • It can still be an invasion of privacy to be monitoring blogs depending on what the purpose is in doing the monitoring. Privacy is not just about secrecy - secrecy is merely one facet of privacy, and is not even the most important one. Privacy is a much broader concept and is about being left the hell alone. The monitoring in this case appears to be planned for the purpose of the school district systematically interfering in stuff that is none of their damned business, and so it can still be an invasion of
      • If you broadcast into the public, you have no right to privacy regarding that matter.

        You are making the same mistake the teacher did - only looking at one aspect of privacy (secrecy). It is also an invasion of privacy to interfere with others without having any particular information about them. Even Webster's shallow and incomplete definition [m-w.com] encompasses this (see 1(b), and to some extent 1(a)). You seem to be limiting your concept of privacy to the paragraph 3 of the definition, so placed because it is

  • What a waste (Score:3, Insightful)

    by nEoN nOoDlE (27594) on Thursday May 25 2006, @08:37PM (#15406681) Homepage
    With the education system as it is now, how did anyone even think of something this inane? We don't have enough teachers to teach, yet alone enough teachers to sift through kids' blogs looking to see if they did something illegal or "inappropriate."
  • Easy Solution (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Ffakr (468921) on Thursday May 25 2006, @08:50PM (#15406741) Homepage
    There is an easy solution to this if the students really find this offensive.

    Sign up for a myspace account if you don't have one. Exchange them among students. Complain about everyone elses account. Everyone ask every day if they have investigated all complaints. I think the biggest offense here from a liability standpoint would likely be the targeting of some students over others.

    I'd also suggest fun with content. It'd be fun to post extensive content on which teachers were less than competent. Nothing libelous or overly inflamatory but it'd be nice to have a post for everytime a teacher was late to class or every time an administrator picked their nose. Just stick to the facts kids. Rat out every shortcoming of the institution and force them to read it all day in and day out. I ran pretty low on the Radar in highschool but I can still think of pleny of shortcommings that they would probably not like to hear about themselves.

    I do believe that Libertyville is a farily large school so it should quickly turn into a giant morass.

    Have fun people.
  • Old News (Score:3, Insightful)

    by DisKurzion (662299) on Friday May 26 2006, @01:53AM (#15407962) Homepage
    Here's a news flash:

    They've been doing this at my old school district for well over a year now. (South-central PA)

    My sister has had friends busted for having Xanga's, Myspace's, etc which detailed either insults directed at teachers, various parties involving drinking, or direct threats to other students (the excuse they use for this in the first place). Some have even had explusion hearings based upon what was stated on their Xanga's (although in one case... it was just the straw that broke the camel's back).

    While there are ways to protect your privacy in these communities, many people don't do it for the simple fact that they INTEDED to be found by their friends. The flaw in the social system is that nobody assumes that their parents would ever check these systems.

    The long and short of it is: If you'd get in trouble (either parentally, scholastically, or legally) for saying it to someone's face, either use a proper layer of privacy, or DON'T FREAKING WRITE IT!
  • I want to surrender all responsibility, rights, thought and action to the school district. Please run my life for me.
    • Re:Don't forget... (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Aeron65432 (805385) <agiamba AT gmail DOT com> on Thursday May 25 2006, @06:57PM (#15406197) Homepage
      Your statement misses the point completely.

      People shouldn't have to conceal their personal information online when the searcher has no right to use it . It'd be bad enough if a school punished students for ranting about school online, but the fact that they are punishing students for anything non-school related is downright draconian and offensive. They have no right to do that.

        • Re:Don't forget... (Score:4, Insightful)

          by Mistshadow2k4 (748958) on Thursday May 25 2006, @08:15PM (#15406559) Journal
          And who gets to decide what's offensive? They do. And if it doesn' tinvolve school, how the hell is it any of their business if a kid says something offensive anyway? You're an absolute fool to think it would only be used against kids who did something illegal.
          • And who gets to decide what's offensive?

            Society does. That's how the world works. The school only gets involved if there is a complaint (and I would imagine a number of complaints or a significant complaint). Hence, *society* external to the school decides on what is offensive. The school mediates. Again, I'm assuming there are rational people in charge at the school and care not about "Jimmy said the F-word on myspace!", but more serious issues like physical threats or mental abuse.

            What is really happening
        • Re:Don't forget... (Score:5, Insightful)

          by laughingcoyote (762272) * <barghesthowl&excite,com> on Thursday May 25 2006, @10:53PM (#15407368) Journal

          If the student posts that he intends to kill his (teacher|principal|schoolmate), whether on the Net or anywhere else, he has made a death threat. Not only may he be discipined by the school, but he is also subject to arrest and prosecution.

          On the other hand, what if he posts a profanity-laden rant about how unfair the grading system is? Not polite, perhaps, but certainly not illegal-and if done off of school hours, EVEN if he posts it on a public website (or shouts it in a public square), he should not be subject to school discipline. Yet, the school could easily state that what he said was "inappropriate", even though it was perfectly legal.

          On the school district's part, it is breathtakingly arrogant-especially for a superintendent to claim that she is not violating the students' rights by "searching" their blogs. Of course she's not, it's up there for anyone in the world to read. However, the students' rights ARE being violated if she is suppressing otherwise legal speech in those blogs. Hell of a way to duck the issue.

          I fully agree that should you be stupid enough to post information about doing something -illegal- in a public place, you deserve what you get. The big concern here is the ever-slippery "inappropriate". Teenagers naturally experiment and push the boundaries. This is a natural and healthy part of adolescence, and so long as the kid is not -crossing- those boundaries (i.e. breaking the law), it is not the school's place to intervene after the kid goes home.

      • Re:But remember (Score:4, Insightful)

        by Anonymous Coward on Thursday May 25 2006, @07:33PM (#15406349)
        I would have loved this in high school...If someone pissed me off, I could just make a myspace/livejournal/blog that seemed to be from their point of view and talk about dropping acids.

        And if I ran one myself, it'd be private.
          • Re:But remember (Score:5, Interesting)

            by Anonymous Coward on Thursday May 25 2006, @09:16PM (#15406864)
            the thing that i found weird was the school considered semi-nudity (guys wearing nothing but tube socks) worse than drugs and alcohol.

            Yes, of course they did. Because when you're a kid (under 18) and post naked pictures of yourself online, that "self expression" is called child porn, and predators feed off of that stuff.

            That's not to say that it is the school's job (IMO, it's not) to be monitoring the activities of students after hours, but if that is their intention, then kids posting naked pictures of themselves should certainly fall under unacceptable behavior.

            That said, were I a parent and my kids were expelled for something they did after hours, after making sure my kids were punished so that they don't begin to think I am on their side for what they did, I would sue the school over a denial of free, public education. I don't pay tax money to have the schools pick and choose who can go to school and who can't based on after school activities. And certainly not because the teachers don't like what they see on MySpace. If you have a personal problem with it, bring it to me. Don't deny my kid an education and hurt their future college prospects just because the idiots decided to talk or brag about stuff (that was probably much more mild in real life, or didn't even happen) on MySpace.
          • The critical issue here is that a private school is not a government agency and as such on on one hand has the right of association and on the other doesn't have the restraints placed on the government by the constitution.
      • Re:But remember (Score:5, Insightful)

        by Tony Hoyle (11698) <tmh@nodomain.org> on Thursday May 25 2006, @08:25PM (#15406613) Homepage
        Basically, We can find you.

        Welcome to America. Land of the free.
        • Re:But remember (Score:5, Insightful)

          by dotoole (881696) on Friday May 26 2006, @12:56AM (#15407789)
          Welcome to America. Land of the free.*










          *Term and Conditions Apply
          • Welcome to America. Land of the free.*
            *Term and Conditions Apply
            Um. Obviously. Only an idiot would think that "free" meant "free to do absolutely anything you want". Of course I'm not free to kill people. I'm not even free to say absolutely anything I want, because some things interfere with the rights of others and/or harm society. That said, yes, welcome to America, land of the free.
        • I went to this very high school and in my senior year they instituted a policy whereby any athlete involved in any way with the police(even actions that involved free speech) could be removed from their team and banned from all sports activities. This is just a logical progression for such a school and the fact the information isn't confirmed or reliable won't stop them from acting on it.

          I'm glad I'm out of that community and it reinforces my weariness of any suburb, anywhere. I feel sorry for the student
          • Re:But remember (Score:5, Insightful)

            Yeah but none of those things are conclusive, or couldn't be forged.

            Let's say there was some kid I really didn't like, named Joe Smith. So first, I go onto GMail, and make an account for Joe.Smith@gmail.com. Then, I go register to MySpace with that email address. While I'm standing around at school, with my cellphone or other small camera, I grab a few photos of Joe. I post those up to "his" MySpace page.

            I develop this page for a few weeks, because I have nothing better to do, and this lends it more credibility. Nobody notices, because of course I haven't actually told anyone who knows the real Joe Smith about it. I start posting some racy stuff. Nothing that would get the Feds / Police / DEA involved, but some stuff that the school admin people wouldn't like. Maybe how I think they're real assholes, and how I wish they would do biologically impossible and reproductively unproductive things with themselves. Or maybe I mention some low-level criminal activity: shoplifting, marijuana, drinking, etc. Allude to underage sex -- there's nothing to get puritanical hearts racing like the thoughts of 17-year-olds getting it on. (Or, for even more effective hell-raising, dig up some good dirt on Joe that's actually true -- everybody has some skeletons in the closet, even at 17 -- and post that to the web page. That makes it harder for him to deny later and increases the potential damage inflicted on his friends.)

            Then, after I've established this for a little while, I drop a dime on "Joe's" online presence, or maybe I just mention it to somebody else's parent (one of those everything-is-my-business, moralistic asshole types). They check out the webpage, and do the predictable kneejerk thing and immediately go to the school principal/headmaster asking for Joe Smith's head on a plate. The administrator looks up the MySpace page in question, finds incriminating text, finds GMail account in Joe's name that's connected .... that's all the evidence they need. Page, photos, email: what more could you want? They toss Joe in front of a kangaroo court (if they even have to do that), where all Joe can do is blubber that it's not his page. But of course the photos are of him, and it's his name on the email ... so he just looks like a liar. Nobody will believe him.

            End result: Joe gets suspended, suspension goes on his permanent record, messes up his chance to go to Princeton, he ends up going to community college and hanging himself while coming off of some bad LSD in his parents basement five years later. Or maybe just going to some other college. Whatever. The point is I was able to fuck with his life without really having to do anything -- I just created some stuff online, revealing nothing about myself besides an IP address (which the school probably wouldn't be able to trace back to me, especially if I was smart enough to use a proxy), and fucked up someone else's life hardcore.

            That's the problem with policies like this: they don't take into account the fact that people will try to manipulate them to harm others, either for their own gain or just for the sheer hell of hurting other people. They're designed shortsightedly, and that's why they're almost always a very, very bad idea.

            • Re:But remember (Score:5, Insightful)

              by tinkertim (918832) * on Friday May 26 2006, @12:51AM (#15407778) Homepage
              I agree. This is just involving parents, community and teachers in high school kid "he said she said" peer politics.

              I've seen a few stories like this over the last week. It looks like schools are trying to step up to fill a lack of adequate parenting when it comes to student's use of the internet. I see the void they are concerned about, but I don't think its the school's place to step up.

              However, since kids only have 2 sources of authority to answer too (parental and school), umm .. where else is it going to come from?

              US Citizens 18 and over should have the run of the internet with no restrictions on what thoughts or content you can publish or contribute. I agree with that because censorship in any form on what is supposed to be a world accessable free medium is bad.

              However a 16 year old posting that he beat the crap out of someone and stole his car, well .. thats not free speech, thats stupid juveninle story telling (or a really stupid junior criminal).

              Point is , if parents were doing their job a bit better .. schools wouldn't feel the need to intervine. I suspect since most public school systems are already under budget and the staff is over taxed, they'd be delighted to no longer feel the need to go "above and beyond" any longer.

              So don't look at this as big brother, look at this as (possibly) a lack of parenting and the school being a bit over eager to correct it.

              I predict this is going to grow to be a national issue with hundreds more stories just like this popping up over the next 12 months.

    • Re:Back underground (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Ithika (703697) on Thursday May 25 2006, @07:31PM (#15406334) Homepage

      No, I think they will just start posting under each others' names.

      1. Find someone you don't like.
      2. Open a MySpace account in their name.
      3. Post incriminating entries.
      4. Inform school.
      5. Profit!!

      It is now apparent what the step before "Profit!!" is: snitch.

      • The motive doesn't have to be getting someone in trouble. It wouldn't be hard to subvert the system, and make the school administrators look like incompetent morons, by large-scale posting under other people's names, preferrably those of students whose parents are prominent and/or wealthy. The first time a student is expelled or otherwise harassed for something they can later prove they didn't do, it'll be legal nightmare for the school, and both expensive and embarassing. This could even be arranged--

    • Under your logic, the officials at Columbine High School shouldn't have done anything unless the kids were drawing up the plans to stage a full-scale assault while they were in art class.

      What a child does outside of class that impacts the campus should rightfully be a concern of the district, even if its not under their direct "authority."

      If a kid on myspace -- aka the backwater of the web where HTML from 1995 is still popular -- is talking about plans to take out a group of students, or running drugs onto
      • Re:I wonder (Score:3, Interesting)

        And what about when they suspend a student because the student posted to a web site that they went a party and got drunk on the weekend.
      • Your logic is flawed. So, if I was still in high school, but I made a Duke Nukem 3d map of my school, the school should be concerned? Well guess what, I in fact made a Duke Nukem 3d map of a layout similar to my school, you know why? Because the building layout made a good map. So not only, under your logic, would I get in trouble, probably get suspended or expelled, I would be labeled as a depressed potential murderer and have a police record. I like that. Even though I had 0 intention of actually actin
      • If a kid on myspace -- aka the backwater of the web where HTML from 1995 is still popular -- is talking about plans to take out a group of students, or running drugs onto campus to sell during lunch, then I think the district not only has a duty, but an obligation, to try and make sure neither happens.

        The district has an obligation to inform the police. Anything less than this is complicity, and anything more is taking the law into their own hands.
    • WHOOSH!!!!

      Did you hear that? That was the sound of the point going over your head. It's not a privacy issue. The problem is that the school is punishing kids for things that they say WHEN THEY'RE NOT ON SCHOOL GROUNDS!!! As soon as that kid steps off of their property, it's none of their damned business what the kids say. And I don't give a crap whether it's just talking about extra-curricular activities or not. They are using this to coerce kids into keeping their mouths shut. Kids are learning abou