Head teacher Paul Woodward said: “I am fairly worried because I want to keep the children safe from those who are inappropriately using the network to groom children or show inappropriate materials or use inappropriate photographs.”
“If they are on a Facebook account or a social networking site, then somebody has told a lie to get them that account – either a sibling or their parents – and that’s not what it is for.”
“I may be overstepping the mark but all I am trying to do is advise the parents that they need to be keeping their children safe.”
You are indeed overstepping the mark. What happens outside the school gates is none of your business and you should stay well out of it. The childrens’ safety is a matter for parents, not a busybody head teacher who thinks his remit extends into the home. It does not.
Get with the program (sic). Only the State and its functionaries are equipped to protect young people (sic).
And my early-warning TWATDAR was pricked by “head teacher” – if you’ll pardon the expression.
XX “If they are on a Facebook account or a social networking site, then somebody has told a lie to get them that account – either a sibling or their parents – and that’s not what it is for.” XX
Because the wee bastards themselves could NEVER tell a lie, right?
Why do these simpeltons never go for the direct target any more?
This lot would give Stalin a pat on the head, a holiday on the black sea, an ice cream, and hang his parents for “crimes against humanity”.
And/Or, of course, any other method for extending his control.
A lot of head-teachers get a little-tin-god mentality, especiu
ally if they are good little christians, I’m afraid.
Euw.
“The childrens’ safety is a matter for parents, not a busybody head teacher ”
I might agree were it not for the fact that schools are increasingly subjected to …and expected to deal with… the nuclear fall out from facebook bullying perpetrated by the little shits both at home and inside school grounds. Unless they can get away with banning all forms of internet social communication within school hours on school grounds they’re stuck between a rock and a hard place.
Realistically, we can’t have it both ways.
The response to that is that they should deal with bullying as and when it occurs, not interfere in stuff that is none of their concern – and people breaching the terms and conditions of a website is absolutely none of their concern.
And the answer to that is; Well yes, the theory is great but, in practice and reality, not so much. Online bullying that doesn’t obviously manifest on school grounds in school time beyond knowing looks and a kid sick to the stomach with fear every day is vile and should always be dealt with. Once aware, the schools are duty bound to intervene despite such technically being “outside the school gates”.
Frankly, and bullying aside, if it wasn’t for the multitude of social problems this particular website brings for under-13’s (and over !) and for just about everyone around them then we wouldn’t even be having this discussion.
I don’t particularly agree with overstating those problems to the point of demanding social services intervention but reducing the whole thing to simply “breaching the terms and conditions of a website” doesn’t help either.
If children are to continue being raised by teachers for 6 hours a day, 5 days a week and for the majority of the year for up to 18 years then they have a right to their say. There just has to be balance and compromise and how hard can that be, really.
Bullying has always occurred and always will. I was bullied at school and had to deal with it as much of it occurred outside school grounds and hours.
All that Farcebook is doing is providing an outlet for it. If it manifests itself at school it is a school problem and they will have to deal with it. Otherwise, not. It really is that simple. And, yes, the majority who are not bullying or being bullied are doing no more than breaching the terms and conditions of the site. Bugger all to do with the school and they should mind their own damned business.
“the majority who are not bullying or being bullied are doing no more than breaching the terms and conditions of the site. Bugger all to do with the school and they should mind their own damned business.”
Nice bit of clarification there of your original statement of “What happens outside the school gates is none of your business and you should stay well out of it. ” and so, with this, I totally agree. This is precisely the kind of balance and compromise I suggest.
It should be a simple matter of “your child is affecting others detrimentally in abusing a website that, technically, they shouldn’t even have access to. Deal with it or we will have to, ta very much.”
Like anything else, it’s all in the language.
Bullying has always occurred and always will. I was bullied at school and had to deal with it as much of it occurred outside school grounds and hours
So has assault but we still do something about it. It is perfectly proper for a headmaster to take an interest in bullying that takes place outside school hours, as the effects are felt within the school, particularly on the self esteem and performance of the victim. If an employee were assaulted by another employee then I would expect the employer to take disciplinary action against the aggressor regardless of whether the attack occurred outside the workplace.
Then it would be a matter for the police, not the employer. If an employee is convicted of an offence, then yes, the employer may decide to take disciplinary action – otherwise, not their business.
Besides, the original piece and my comments made no mention of bullying. The head teacher was getting his knickers wet over the mythical paedogeddon we are all supposed to be worrying about.
Then it would be a matter for the police, not the employer. If an employee is convicted of an offence, then yes, the employer may decide to take disciplinary action – otherwise, not their business
In the real world, you’ll find that it is a matter for both. Such an incident is likely to have repercussions within the workplace. Of course the employer will take action. What that action will be should be dependent on the facts of the matter. It may be forced separation of the antagonists or it may be dismissal of the aggressor for gross misconduct. The employer is not bound by the results of any criminal prosecution or lack of.
If a boss inteferes in my free time, then he can fucking pay me 24/7.
UNTIL that point, it has fuck ALL to do with the bastard what I do in my FREE TIME.
Well, quite. There is a difference between bullying behaviour and assault which is a criminal offence. A criminal offence may well affect one’s employment. However, bullying behaviour that takes place outside of work is not the employer’s business, no matter how unpleasant it is. Too many employers, and in this case schools, seem to think that they own us body and soul. They do not. What happens outside of the working day and the school’s/employer’s premises is none of their business.
There used to be a tradition of parents and school working together. When we had a nation, that was.
Or … just NOT having a facebook account?
That’s my preferred solution. It works for me 😉