Students Banned From Blogging At A Catholic School

[RITFencing]

I've recently come across some of these teenager blogs and 'myspace' sites with a new perspective on them. My kids don't have them, but it seems that some of thier friends do. I'm certainly an all out supporter of civil liberties - certainly of the rights to privacy and speech and expression, but I can tell you that I would not allow my own children to keep and post to these public blogs and spaces. Additionally if I were a school administrator I would tell the parents of my students to go out and look at the sites and what thier children have posted. And then suggest that they take a second thought about whether they want their children posting on these sites.

I think this would be the best way to handle the situation. School is an important part of a kids life, but I don't think it should become a substitue for parents 24/7.

Sorry to sound tedious on this one, Achellius. It may be that parents don't have much impact on the average child, but I know they had an impact on my life and I think it was for the better. If a lot of parents have this problem, I think it's perfectly acceptable for the PTA or whatever similar group that school has (or even just the administration for that matter) to educate parents about this, but I still believe the final descision should rest with the parents of each kid.

[Maeve_Mari]

I understand your point and in so many ways agree with it. Certainly it is the parents responsibility and requirement to monitor their children's activity.
Unfortunately so many parents fail at doing that.

I noticed as my kids were going through school and activities how easy it was for me to "separate" them from relationships and activities I didn't like. Conveniently a playmate I didn't like, would just not ever be available to come over to play, or when planning parties I could easily suggest a tablet of names, leaving that one child off the list. Managing and monitoring who my kids played with, or where they went, made it easier to keep them growing up within my personal boundries for acceptable behavior.

I think that's what the school is trying to do in its over-reaching manner. If they exclude the behavior they want to avoid, then their students won't be associating with it. If blogging is conveniently prohibited, then right there, the majority of their students won't be blogging. Making it that much easier to control the spread of blog behavior (and the bragging/soul searching/agony of growing up) that goes along with it.

I understand your point, for sure, and it's correct that it shouldn't be the schools making these decisions, but on the other hand, you don't get two chance to raise and educate your children and it's good to know that someone is watching out for them.

[RITFencing]

I understand your point and in so many ways agree with it. Certainly it is the parents responsibility and requirement to monitor their children's activity.
Unfortunately so many parents fail at doing that.

I noticed as my kids were going through school and activities how easy it was for me to "separate" them from relationships and activities I didn't like. Conveniently a playmate I didn't like, would just not ever be available to come over to play, or when planning parties I could easily suggest a tablet of names, leaving that one child off the list. Managing and monitoring who my kids played with, or where they went, made it easier to keep them growing up within my personal boundries for acceptable behavior.

I think that's what the school is trying to do in its over-reaching manner. If they exclude the behavior they want to avoid, then their students won't be associating with it. If blogging is conveniently prohibited, then right there, the majority of their students won't be blogging. Making it that much easier to control the spread of blog behavior (and the bragging/soul searching/agony of growing up) that goes along with it.

I understand your point, for sure, and it's correct that it shouldn't be the schools making these decisions, but on the other hand, you don't get two chance to raise and educate your children and it's good to know that someone is watching out for them.

I agree, and I also think that a lack of parental involvement is a big problem in today's society.

As far as the dangers of blogging? I don't agree on that point. Actually, I think they could be useful tools if a parent or school administrator felt like reading them. I know, you'll have to wade through a lot of BS, but you can also gain remarkable insight into the kids' lives and thoughts, without the violation of privacy associated with reading a diary. If a blog is online, they can't blame people who read it.

EDIT: As an appendix, I would say that it's still very important to make sure kids understand never to leave things like phone numbers and addresses online, and to teach them the value of obscuring such information.

[Maeve_Mari]

I agree, and I also think that a lack of parental involvement is a big problem in today's society.

As far as the dangers of blogging? I don't agree on that point. Actually, I think they could be useful tools if a parent or school administrator felt like reading them. I know, you'll have to wade through a lot of BS, but you can also gain remarkable insight into the kids' lives and thoughts, without the violation of privacy associated with reading a diary. If a blog is online, they can't blame people who read it.

EDIT: As an appendix, I would say that it's still very important to make sure kids understand never to leave things like phone numbers and addresses online, and to teach them the value of obscuring such information.

I agree that it IS a useful tool for a parent to be able to read a publicly posted blog. But... so can anyone else. School administrators, college selection boards, future employers, law enforcement personnel, other parents and neighbors! Posting personal information about yourself in a public forum could lead to discrimination, rejection, perhaps even legal prosecution. It's one thing when it is an adult making a conscious decision to open up their lives and take the risk that goes along with that decision, but quite another when it is a minor who just might not yet realize the impact their posts could have on their future.

It's like getting a tattoo when you are only 5 years old. Aren't going to be a little embarassed over that tat of Barney the purple dinosaur when he's visibily present underneath the sheer white lace of your wedding dress?

I think I would rather snoop my children's private diary alone in my house, then to let her comments - some possibly true, many possibly bragged, and some just a twisted teenage perspective on life - be read and judged by others.

And what about the legal question of what is posted in the blogs? Can you get arrested for posting that you were at a party on Friday night where you provided and smoked the pot? Doesn't that now make you an admitted dealer and set you up for prosecution. As a parent wouldn't you want to handle this privately instead of with law enforcement assistance? Do you want your kid kicked out of school and the administrative headaches that go along with getting him back, based on brags he posted online?

I did notice that on myspace, when you search, you only return results for members over 18. I assume that is their method for protecting minors from predators. But it doesn't take but one or two clicks before you can find a friend's space who is under 18.

[RITFencing]

I agree that it IS a useful tool for a parent to be able to read a publicly posted blog. But... so can anyone else. School administrators, college selection boards, future employers, law enforcement personnel, other parents and neighbors! Posting personal information about yourself in a public forum could lead to discrimination, rejection, perhaps even legal prosecution. It's one thing when it is an adult making a conscious decision to open up their lives and take the risk that goes along with that decision, but quite another when it is a minor who just might not yet realize the impact their posts could have on their future.

Like I said in my post, I think it's important to teach the kid to use their blog responsibly and not give out personal information. This isn't a new thing, either; people have been worried about the danger since BBS systems and IRC were all the rage. A general rule of thumb is that you don't say anything on a blog that you wouldn't tell to a total stranger. Even when I was a teen or a child, I knew enough not to walk up to some random person, tell them my name and phone number, where I live, and when I'm home. I'd be pretty suspicious if I was asked that.

It's like getting a tattoo when you are only 5 years old. Aren't going to be a little embarassed over that tat of Barney the purple dinosaur when he's visibily present underneath the sheer white lace of your wedding dress?

I think I would rather snoop my children's private diary alone in my house, then to let her comments - some possibly true, many possibly bragged, and some just a twisted teenage perspective on life - be read and judged by others.

I don't have kids, so I'm going to reserve judgment on that. I know that if I kept a diary when I was younger (I didn't) then I would be furious if someone read it without my permission.

And what about the legal question of what is posted in the blogs? Can you get arrested for posting that you were at a party on Friday night where you provided and smoked the pot? Doesn't that now make you an admitted dealer and set you up for prosecution. As a parent wouldn't you want to handle this privately instead of with law enforcement assistance? Do you want your kid kicked out of school and the administrative headaches that go along with getting him back, based on brags he posted online?

Can you get arrested for saying things like "I smoked a joint last firday night?" Probably not. It's possible, I suppose. I would like to think that the school system would respond with trying to help a kid with an alchoholism problem rather than punishing him, but I'm not naive enough to believe so. Honestly, I don't think bragging posted on a blog will hold up in a court of law.

I did notice that on myspace, when you search, you only return results for members over 18. I assume that is their method for protecting minors from predators. But it doesn't take but one or two clicks before you can find a friend's space who is under 18.

Still, responsible use is the key. If your kid doesn't post his name, the name of his school, or things like that, they become really hard to find. What about teaching kids the right way to use something instead of a futile attempt to ban it?

[achilleus]

I think this would be the best way to handle the situation. School is an important part of a kids life, but I don't think it should become a substitue for parents 24/7.

Sorry to sound tedious on this one, Achellius. It may be that parents don't have much impact on the average child, but I know they had an impact on my life and I think it was for the better. If a lot of parents have this problem, I think it's perfectly acceptable for the PTA or whatever similar group that school has (or even just the administration for that matter) to educate parents about this, but I still believe the final descision should rest with the parents of each kid.

Who said the school is becoming a substitute parent? A private school working in conjunction with the parents is the goal. Not the school becoming the parent.

And you're free to think it's parents job and the school shouldn't be involved at all. Don't send your kid to private school. Private school's have the right to make these rules, and most of the parents who send their kids to these schools approve of the schools decisions and want the schools input. If they didn't, people wouldn't be sending their kids to the schools. A phrase comes to mind about about how it takes a village to raise a child or something...

And you're free to think the parents have huge impact on their child since you feel they did with you. Some studies, show otherwise. I don't think there is one definitive study that answers all questions...

[MyrddinsPrecint]

my catholic school experiences

the year after i graduated from my catholic high school, a bunch of students in uniform at a playground kitty corner to the school getting got caught a half hour before school getting high, and those kids were suspended (most of them not graduating as a result of missing about half of their final exams because of the suspension.) that, i think, was valid. that was illegal behaviour while clearly representing the school.


but the blog i had/have, that listed no way to contact me, and was "friends only"??? that's not as big of a deal. the general public couldn't read it.

in 8th grade, they sent a letter home, telling us we shouldn't call each other after 9PM, ever. The parents involved thought it was rediculous, and laughed it off.

the catholic school administration tried to tell a good friend's mother that her son's friends were horrible people who were leading him down a bad path. she became irate, and made the administrator apologize.

my senior year, when one of my friends was raped by someone at the school, it was a horrible mess. afterwards, no one was friendly with him anymore. no one was rude, or mean. no one threatened him. everyone just had something better to do whenever he was around. his mother threatened to sue. the girl who was raped was called into the office, and she was told that her friends needed to be nicer to the rapist. ---- even if everyone had beat him up on a regular basis, that had nothing to do with her.



the point

catholic schools are a lot better in some ways--- they can kick out the worst people, they can say things and do things that other places can't. but they also end up doing a lot of things that don't actually make sense, and a lot of things that are harmful, horrible, and kind of immoral.

telling kids not to blog at school? fine. telling kids they shouldn't blog at home? fine. but actually trying to penalize kids when they do blog at school won't work all that well in the way they want it to-- the blogs will get better hidden. which will help protect the kids from pedophiles and the like.

but, uh, don't these schools have better things to worry about?

my catholic high school had a huge drug problem, and a fairly sizeable rape problem. oh, and no one's shirts were tucked in. couldn't we maybe worry about that first?

[Philistine]

{snip}
3. While the parents have presumably agreed to all rules that this school has laid out, have the students done so? Is the legal situation (where that school is situated) so that whenever the parents and school agree upon something against the will of the child/student, is the latter without recourse?

Generally, yes. Especially on something like choice of school, the parents' decision will be enforced unconditionally (absent some sort of extreme circumstances).

4. Private organizations are free to set almost any rules among themselves, but that freedom generally comes with a limitation - no tax money. According to the original link, it appears that the school has indeed gotten tax money. Any entity that gets tax money should be forced to obey rules set by the political assembly that spends the tex money.

I didn't see in the original link where they got tax money. My general understanding (which very well may be wrong) was that in the US, religious elementary/secondary schools do not receive tax money.

However, even if they did, I don't see a requirement that they must follow whatever rules the taxing authority decides.

{snip}
7. Those that enter Achilleus salle, do so on their own accord and are free to leave at any time, as he noted. In contrast, the students have enrolled on their parent´s accord, and presumably have little or no input in the descisions. Should they wish to leave, they are also presumably not able to do that.

Actually, should they wish to leave it seems fairly easy. Just start a blog....

--Philistine

[achilleus]

in 8th grade, they sent a letter home, telling us we shouldn't call each other after 9PM, ever. The parents involved thought it was rediculous, and laughed it off.

Funny, my folks would've looked at that letter, and said, 'What parent let's their kid use the phone at that hour? Don't they realize that people are getting ready for bed? These young parents really don't know how to parent.'

In other words, my parents and the parents they were friends with would've thought it was silly and felt it understood that kids go to sleep early, and you don't disturb another house after certain hours.

[RITFencing]

Who said the school is becoming a substitute parent? A private school working in conjunction with the parents is the goal. Not the school becoming the parent.

That should be the goal. When the school starts instituing rules for kids at home, they start to take over the parent's duties rather than work together.

And you're free to think it's parents job and the school shouldn't be involved at all. Don't send your kid to private school. Private school's have the right to make these rules, and most of the parents who send their kids to these schools approve of the schools decisions and want the schools input. If they didn't, people wouldn't be sending their kids to the schools. A phrase comes to mind about about how it takes a village to raise a child or something...

Most of us who disagree with the policy above probably won't, or at least we won't send our kids to schools like the one mentioned. As far as rights, once again this isn't about the right of the school to make rules. This is about whether one rule is a good one.

And you're free to think the parents have huge impact on their child since you feel they did with you. Some studies, show otherwise. I don't think there is one definitive study that answers all questions...

You're probably right here. It's hard to show definitive things about children when there's really no control group to compare results to.

[Mr Epee]

Funny, my folks would've looked at that letter, and said, 'What parent let's their kid use the phone at that hour? Don't they realize that people are getting ready for bed? These young parents really don't know how to parent.'

In other words, my parents and the parents they were friends with would've thought it was silly and felt it understood that kids go to sleep early, and you don't disturb another house after certain hours.

That's funny!

Same situation when I was growing up, and even today, I don't call people after 9pm, unless I have made arrangements earlier.

And if you call me after 9pm, you are pretty much guaranteed a spot on my "I think you're an ignorant peasant list".

[achilleus]

That should be the goal. When the school starts instituing rules for kids at home, they start to take over the parent's duties rather than work together.

No. The parents are willing participants. If the parents dislike the influence of the school, they can disregard the rules and/or leave. So, it is in conjunction with the parents. After all when they sign up, they're told, you represent our school 24/7/365. Don't like it, don't sign the dotted line, and don't pay us all that tuition money. Yet the parents keep signing up, and keep paying. Don't you think this is a sign of complicity?

Most of us who disagree with the policy above probably won't, or at least we won't send our kids to schools like the one mentioned. As far as rights, once again this isn't about the right of the school to make rules. This is about whether one rule is a good one.

I think the rule is questionnable. I think teenagers blogging is stupid.
But I defend the right of the school to do so, and think that if parents choose to send their kids to private schools, the get what they want. If they don't want this, don't go to private schools.

[MyrddinsPrecint]

Funny, my folks would've looked at that letter, and said, 'What parent let's their kid use the phone at that hour? Don't they realize that people are getting ready for bed? These young parents really don't know how to parent.'

In other words, my parents and the parents they were friends with would've thought it was silly and felt it understood that kids go to sleep early, and you don't disturb another house after certain hours.

i don't call anyone's house phone after 10 unless I know them very well. i don't call anyone's house phone after 9 unless i know them fairly well.

and then there's the invention of cell phones--- which means that there are certain people i can call at any time-- because i know that if they're accepting calls, their cell phone is on, and if they aren't accepting calls, their cell phone is on silent or off.

the biggest reason that my parents laughed off the "no calling after 9" thing was that the policy was NOT to discourage late night calling amongst kids who thought it was OK to call their friends at midnight, it was specifically to discourage cheating. and one can cheat over the phone just as easily at 3:45 pm as at 9:15 pm.

[achilleus]

i don't call anyone's house phone after 10 unless I know them very well. i don't call anyone's house phone after 9 unless i know them fairly well.

and then there's the invention of cell phones--- which means that there are certain people i can call at any time-- because i know that if they're accepting calls, their cell phone is on, and if they aren't accepting calls, their cell phone is on silent or off.

Yup, times have changed, and my parents brought me up in a particular way. IMO, they are old fashioned.

the biggest reason that my parents laughed off the "no calling after 9" thing was that the policy was NOT to discourage late night calling amongst kids who thought it was OK to call their friends at midnight, it was specifically to discourage cheating. and one can cheat over the phone just as easily at 3:45 pm as at 9:15 pm.

In my househould, growing up it makes perfect sense. I couldn't get on the phone alone until later anyways. Earlier, someone was always around, or I was off at practice.

Look, I'm not claiming all the rules they make are great, or make sense. I'm just saying the school has a right to do it. Parents who sign their kids up, know what they're getting into. And either the parents want the school's influence, or are willing to put up with it.

If the parents really felt this was intrusive and an offense against free speech, well they are free to take their kids and leave. If the majority felt this way, private schools wouldn't be in such high demand.