Missouri Teachers warned about contact to student

sara1981

sara1981

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 5, 2004
Messages
7,870
Reaction score
71
Missouri Teachers Warned About Internet Contact With Students
Missouri Teachers Warned About Internet Contact With Students - ArkansasMatters.com

(Kansas City, MO) -- For Missouri teachers life just got a little more complicated.

School districts in the state have been told to draft policies that put them in compliance with a new law that restricts online contact between teachers and students using social networking sites.

The law isn't popular with teachers who say it sort of assumes all teachers are guilty of something inappropriate.

The Missouri State Teachers Association is planning to ask state lawmakers to modify the law that goes into effect later this month.

Missouri State Senator Jane Cunningham says the law is just a small part of a larger piece of legislation passed in response to cases involving teachers who developed sexual relationships with students.

The Republican insists teachers can still interact with students on Facebook or other online social sites as long as those sites and the contact is open to administrators and parents.
(Copyright 2011 by VERTEXNews/Newsroom Solutions)
Click to expand...
 
According to a friend we have there, it also, for her school district, is including cell phone, text messages, email and IM's. The teachers and administrators are only allowed to have contact with the parent or guardian. This friend is a secretary for the high school. She had to delete over 600 names on facebook this weekend.
 
Sounds simple to me.

Hire teachers who hate students and all children.

Then we shall surely have much improved schooling and no inappropriate contact.
 
Beowulf said:
Berry was being facetious.
Presuming guilt on all parties is unhealthy as well, but that is what they are doing to the teachers.
Click to expand...

Right!

And what is, or would be, healthy?

Knowing teachers, police, the store keeper, the librarian, outside of work -- As human beings who carry on lives with spouses and families just like mommy and daddy -- And knowing mommy and daddy outside the home in their work place.

Over compartmentalization is turning the real world into TV channels where real life, real people, the whole person, rather than bits and pieces, never happens.

Do we really want a society where children grow up never seeing people as whole human beings but only as the functions they perform in our presence?
 
Berry said:
Right!

And what is, or would be, healthy?

Knowing teachers, police, the store keeper, the librarian, outside of work -- As human beings who carry on lives with spouses and families just like mommy and daddy -- And knowing mommy and daddy outside the home in their work place.

Over compartmentalization is turning the real world into TV channels where real life, real people, the whole person, rather than bits and pieces, never happens.

Do we really want a society where children grow up never seeing people as whole human beings but only as the functions they perform in our presence?
Click to expand...

If they start passing laws saying that teachers arent allowed to be in contact with students in person outside of school, I will start to worry.
 
Arkansas has enacted a similar law as well starting with this school year. A lot of teachers were on FB Sunday night deleting students from their friends list and posting statuses explaining the new law and why they were defriending their students and instead are making public pages where their students can post messages.
 
shel90 said:
If they start passing laws saying that teachers arent allowed to be in contact with students in person outside of school, I will start to worry.
Click to expand...

Looks to me like it is headed that way.

Our whole "professional" concept is skewed.

For example if you become an interpreter you are not supposed to associate with any Deaf socially and you are not supposed to accept as clients any Deaf you socialize with.

In most communities this means you either can't interpret or you can't be friendly to Deaf people.

Unless you live in New York or Los Angeles where there is large enough Deaf community.
 
Berry said:
Looks to me like it is headed that way.

Our whole "professional" concept is skewed.

For example if you become an interpreter you are not supposed to associate with any Deaf socially and you are not supposed to accept as clients any Deaf you socialize with.

In most communities this means you either can't interpret or you can't be friendly to Deaf people.

Unless you live in New York or Los Angeles where there is large enough Deaf community.
Click to expand...

What? how are terps going to become fluent in ASL(or BSL or any other sign lanugage)?

I know one terp in Richmond who likes to go to silent dinners in her spare time.
I agree the whole professional concept is skewed big time!
 
shel90 said:
If they start passing laws saying that teachers arent allowed to be in contact with students in person outside of school, I will start to worry.
Click to expand...

Me too, since many teachers are mentors and coaches to students... A few bad teachers that has gotten romantically involved with students is the main reason why this law is passed.
 
I think Jiro and I think alike in one area.

Everything can be defined in terms of cost versus reward, or potential reward.

In other words everything has an economics and it does not have to be money. It can be as abstract as isolation versus a feeling of belonging. It can be different for each person. Some people hate crowds, others cannot stand being alone.

Is what society gains in protecting children from unhealthy relationships worth the cost of the healthy relationships they would develop?

Are there other ways, perhaps better ways, to achieve this?

My first thought is building stronger family ties.

Is it possible to have criteria that eliminates potential offenders before they even study to become teachers?

Are there psychological tests that would uncover pedophilia?

Does graphoanalysis actually detect these things?

I am sure there are other, better questions, and better answers.
 
I think I recall reading somewhere that now to become a Catholic priest, you have to pass an analysis that can detect a persons tendency for pedophilia. The Catholic Church is trying to bar pedos and potential would-be pedos from ever working as clergy, especially in the spotlight of sex scandals and abuse all over the media.

Back before the 1980s, before this family dysfunction became so normal for nearly every family on the block, students simply did not 'hang' with their teachers. It was seen as 'uncool' and teachers simply did not associate with students outside of school hours for the very reason that if they did, everyone in the community would think there was something scandalous taking place.

This was before teachers were encouraged (or should I say, forced) to become a friend to their students as well as a replacement parent, counselor, advocate, mentor, etc. With all of this sudden hyper-involvement with students, it was only a matter of time before some would cross the line.

Do you see a pattern here?
1. Teachers did not associate with students because it was discouraged.
2. Students begin to have dysfunctional families.
3. Teachers begin to replace the students' families because it was encouraged.
4. Close relationships form - some are too close.
5. Government decides that student-teacher relations is a no-no, these relationships are actually illegal now.

Round and round we go!
 
Berry said:
I think Jiro and I think alike in one area.

Everything can be defined in terms of cost versus reward, or potential reward.

In other words everything has an economics and it does not have to be money. It can be as abstract as isolation versus a feeling of belonging. It can be different for each person. Some people hate crowds, others cannot stand being alone.

Is what society gains in protecting children from unhealthy relationships worth the cost of the healthy relationships they would develop?

Are there other ways, perhaps better ways, to achieve this?

My first thought is building stronger family ties.

Is it possible to have criteria that eliminates potential offenders before they even study to become teachers?

Are there psychological tests that would uncover pedophilia?

Does graphoanalysis actually detect these things?

I am sure there are other, better questions, and better answers.
Click to expand...

A good lawyer asks questions to which the answers are already known. Are you being a good lawyer, or do you really not know?
 
Beowulf said:
A good lawyer asks questions to which the answers are already known. Are you being a good lawyer, or do you really not know?
Click to expand...

A good thinker posits questions that will produce a profitable journey of thought and a destination worth contimplating. Always keeping in mind that the journey to an answer may be more profitable than reaching the destination.

I am a thinking person. I know very little and question everything. I very seldom know exactly where I am going but I'm sure I'll have fun on the way and fun when I get there.

Answers are interesting but they are of most importance to lawyers who want to win cases and intellectuals who want to show off their knowledge.
 
Berry said:
A good thinker posits questions that will produce a profitable journey of thought and a destination worth contimplating. Always keeping in mind that the journey to an answer may be more profitable than reaching the destination.

I am a thinking person. I know very little and question everything. I very seldom know exactly where I am going but I'm sure I'll have fun on the way and fun when I get there.

Answers are interesting but they are of most importance to lawyers who want to win cases and intellectuals who want to show off their knowledge.
Click to expand...

Ahhh, I see. That is undisciplined thinking. That is fun, sure, but without a goal it is a waste of time. One may invent the light bulb all over again, but...Effective thinking requires a background of previous knowledge and a willingness to gain more knowledge. (I am not putting you down, see I see your point. :))
 
Beowulf said:
Ahhh, I see. That is undisciplined thinking. That is fun, sure, but without a goal it is a waste of time. One may invent the light bulb all over again, but...Effective thinking requires a background of previous knowledge and a willingness to gain more knowledge. (I am not putting you down, see I see your point. :))
Click to expand...

I would like to discuss, without arguing or derailing the thread.

Can we redefine some terms here.

Effective thinking is like a rifle. It has a specific problem as a target and the attempt is to find the bullet that will solve the problem.

One problem with this approach, socially, is that most politicians are lawyers and a lawyers first reaction is to write a law, whether it is the right law or not, or if it is even needed or not.

Which is what is happening here.

My approach is more like a shotgun. Aim at the target, shoot a volley of possibilities at it and see what hits.

I can problem solve, but I often start with a shotgun and work my way down.
 
Berry said:
I would like to discuss, without arguing or derailing the thread.

Can we redefine some terms here.

Effective thinking is like a rifle. It has a specific problem as a target and the attempt is to find the bullet that will solve the problem.

One problem with this approach, socially, is that most politicians are lawyers and a lawyers first reaction is to write a law, whether it is the right law or not, or if it is even needed or not.

Which is what is happening here.

My approach is more like a shotgun. Aim at the target, shoot a volley of possibilities at it and see what hits.

I can problem solve, but I often start with a shotgun and work my way down.
Click to expand...

I like it! :D
 
Back
Top