Friday, August 05, 2011
CNN Video: Jane Cunningham, Turner debate Facebook Law
The accompanying video shows the CNN segment from Thursday in which Sen. Jane Cunningham, R-Chesterfield, and I discuss the new Facebook Law.
In the video, Cunningham does the following:
-Continues to label Missouri teachers as predators, and continuing the lie that there are more in Missouri than in most other states. As I have noted before, one of the reasons Missouri has had a larger number of teachers lose their teaching licenses for sexual offenses is because this state actually toughened its laws. We are being penalized because our statistics are higher than states where nothing has been done.
-Tells viewers that there are more sex offenders among Missouri teachers than there are in the Catholic Church.
-She plays word games. Of course, she says, the law doesn't target teachers, because there are also administrators, coaches, and counselors who have to follow it. All of those people fall under the category of educators. She also continues repeating her mantra that Facebook is not mentioned in the law. No, of course, it is not, but the law obviously includes Facebook.
-With her longstanding grudge against public schools and teachers, it is obvious she is enjoying the fallout from this law. She says the law doesn't prohibit anything, which is false, unless by that she means (and she does) that school boards are the ones who are going to have to implement the policies and it is up to them.
-Doesn't ever say how this will prevent even one child from being victimized. Mrs. Cunningham, who railed against big government when it came to the health care plan, has no problem with it if it helps her continue her war against public education.
I apologize for the poor quality of the video.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
10 comments:
I'm thrilled that the media is actually putting some of these questions out there, and letting you say your piece. You were quite moderate, articulate: it's hard to keep up when she keeps throwing out error after error....
I fail to see what is wrong with the law because your uses of Facebook that you have put out on the web could have all been done in a public manner.
The provisions of this law have already been enacted by dozens of individual school boards across the nation. Most people fail to understand why social media would ever need to be used between a teacher and student privately, one on one. Why would a responsible teacher have a problem with making an account public to all students and parents in order to communicate?
I taught in a Missouri district where a male teacher was caught
'sexting' with at least one teenage female student (before this 'Facebook' law was even written). It was my understanding that after this teacher was caught and forced to resign, district officials worked with DESE to have the teacher's teaching certificate pulled. Our state already has laws and procedures in place to handle these types of cases. All that this 'Facebook' law will do will be to further limit good teachers to do their jobs effectively and will impose ridiculous sanctions against those teachers that use social networking sites correctly.
I believe Ms. Cunningham needed to do more h-o-m-e-w-o-r-k before making the incorrect comments that she made. You did a great job Randy of stating facts.
Look Turner, you don't have a 'right' to contact students privately after school hours any more than Pete Newman had a 'right' to have private sessions with the kiddie campers in a hot tub.
You can whine about it all you want but the law has passed and been signed and you whining about it means that this law is spot on.
Being friends with someone on Facebook is a far cry from getting in a hot tub with them. On topic: Laws don't stop criminals and teachers who would be willing to have sexual relations with a student don't need Facebook to do it.
Let me give you an example to help explain a major problem with this law: I don't always drive the speed limit. To help myself not get a speeding ticket, I bought a radar detector for my vehicle that lets me know when the police are around and actively looking for people who are not following the rules of the road. When my radar detector sounds, I adjust my driving speed appropriately. I guess you could say that I have found a way to circumvent a law that is currently on the books and at the same time, I am much less likely to be sanctioned for speeding with an expensive fine.
Let's use this example to explain Jane Cummingham's law. This law will 'entice' the idiot teachers who want to engage in illicit behaviors with their students to NOT use social networking sites. Instead, they will resort back to phones and written or verbal communication. With sites like Facebook, "predatory teachers" would leave an electronic trail of evidence behind to document their actions thast would help aid in their job dismissal, assist in their arrest, and help in getting their teaching certificate revoked. If a teacher is truly a "predatory teacher", he or she will find ways around the new law and behave inappropiately no matter what law or laws are on the books.
Also, with most public school districts in Missouri being financially strapped, who is going to pay a person or a group of people to monitor the teachers? Let's face it: over 99% of teachers are doing what they are supposed to be doing and are always aware of appropiate, professional, and legal teacher-student relationships. Why persecute an overwhelming majority of teachers who are not "predatory" just because a very small group of people made very poor and incredibly bad decisions?
I work in a school district that is not in Missouri and our school board policy states that we cannot friend students in a private manner, but can certainly have classroom public accounts and post announcements or links to homework help, etc. This works fine.
It's silly that you think this law forces a predator into other means to violate a student. Cell phones create records as well as social media. One reason our board acted was because well intending teachers were rushing into using social media without considering how both students and teachers could cross a line into too much private information being shared.
If you are using social media SO extensively to counsel students over private issues, I can't help but wonder why you, as a teacher would not be enlisting help from principals, counselors, or others in the community to help the students. Your main job is to prepare lessons, do assessments and guide students; not become their guardian. So why would this law stifle the majority of your use of social media??
As a parent, would you would certainly be suspicious if your child spent time behind closed doors or on the phone privately with a teacher or coach. Why should social media be any different than how teachers are held accountable to contact students in other means?
By being asked to make an account public, and simply include parents and an administrator, you think this PERSECUTES teachers?? You are an embarrassment to the profession.
For you teachers who think Facebook is the best thing since sliced bread, and that you can't be as effective without private friending, consider these studies:
http://www.theatlanticwire.com/technology/2011/08/what-facebook-does-kids-brains/40973/
Post a Comment