Merged Brownback cries about teen tweet

[Nova Land]

I guess my use of words like "if the story is true" and "if she actually did that" were not clear indication that my endorsement of the principals actions were contingent on the story being true and the girl actually being guilty. I see that I failed, but am truly at a loss as to how I might have been more clear.

I think your post was well-worded, and made it clear this was something you had heard but not something you could vouch for.

Heard a more detailed story on a local radio show this morning. I haven't really tried to confirm the details yet, but according to the story, the woman was tweeting during school, from school - a practice that is expressly forbidden by policy. If so...

That is clear, honest, and helpful to others of us interested in discussing the topic.

I replied to your post because the story that she had been back on school grounds at the time she made the tweet sounded unlikely to me. But that's pure speculation on my part (as I hope my post also made clear).

Like you, I have not verified the details of the story. It seemed more likely to me that the details as presented in the CNN story were correct, rather than the details in the more recent version you had heard, but that's something we still don't know.

 

[Nova Land]

In both cases the student has broken the rule against texting in class. But in my opinion the teacher is justified in meting out a more severe penalty for case (b) than for case (a). In this case, content matters; free speech rules do not apply.

I disagree with you that content matters under any of the circumstances you listed unless there's a school policy against it.

Perhaps someone who is a teacher can weigh in on this. I'm not one (nor have I been a student in grade school for quite some time) so can't speak authoritatively. But I would be very surprised if you turn out to be right on this.

To me it seems simply common sense that a teacher who intercepted a note being passed in class which said "**** Darat!" would react differently (and impose a different penalty) than if the note said "LashL is so cute!". For the latter, simply reading the note out loud to the class and embarassing the student would likely be considered adequate punishment; for the former, I can easily imagine the teacher sending the student to the principal's office or assigning detention. And I do not think any principal or school board would criticize the teacher for applying a harsher penalty to the former offense.

It would also matter whether school policy extends to field trips as to whether rules that govern the classroom also cover field trips.

I agree. In fact, that was the point of my first post in this thread. Sorry if you missed it; please go back and read it if you did.

It all boils down to whether there were rules prohibiting her actions, and what the disciplinary policy is for infractions. If there is a rule against tweeting in the classroom, and if the rules generally extend to field trips (as they often do), then she was guilty of tweeting during class.

Yes. That was the point of my fifth post (the one you are responding to).

We don't know whether she was violating rules or not as far as making the tweet. We also don't know whether she was violating rules or not as far as the content of the tween.

Checkmite argued that the tweet's content was excessively vulgar (based on the idea the interpretation that the tweet is saying that Brownback is engaged in fellatio). Tyr_13 argued that the tweet's content is irrelevant. I argued (a) that Checkmite's interpretation is incorrect, and (b) that the content may indeed be relevant, depending on the school's rules (which we still don't know) and the actual circumstances of the incident (which we also still don't know).

It should be noted that, although in the first part of your post you argue that content does not matter, in this later part of your post you argue (as I do) that content does matter:

If there was a rule against being disrespectful of guest speakers, then she is guilty of being disrespectful of Brownback.​

That's saying that a respectful tweet would not be a violation but a disrespectful one would be -- a purely content-based distinction.

 

[sarge]

I think your post was well-worded, and made it clear this was something you had heard but not something you could vouch for.




That is clear, honest, and helpful to others of us interested in discussing the topic.

I replied to your post because the story that she had been back on school grounds at the time she made the tweet sounded unlikely to me. But that's pure speculation on my part (as I hope my post also made clear).

Like you, I have not verified the details of the story. It seemed more likely to me that the details as presented in the CNN story were correct, rather than the details in the more recent version you had heard, but that's something we still don't know.

Your original post was clear as well. I was responding to another poster that employed a bit of snark. All's good.

 

[Bri]

It should be noted that, although in the first part of your post you argue that content does not matter, in this later part of your post you argue (as I do) that content does matter:

If there was a rule against being disrespectful of guest speakers, then she is guilty of being disrespectful of Brownback.​

I don't think I ever said content doesn't matter in my post. What I said was that content doesn't matter unless there is a rule concerning content.

That's saying that a respectful tweet would not be a violation but a disrespectful one would be -- a purely content-based distinction.

Only if there's a rule concerning disrespect in tweets made during school hours. Otherwise, the content shouldn't matter at all.

If that's what you meant, then we're in agreement.

ETA: I would guess that most schools have a policy about tweeting during class hours (including field trips) but don't specify anything about the content of tweets. If that is the case here, then content shouldn't matter and she should be disciplined in whatever way is specified in the policy for tweeting during class (which probably wouldn't include any sort of apology since the rule covers any tweeting during class regardless of content).

-Bri

 

[tyr_13]

supersnip

A well thought out post, but I'd like to point out a few things. The tweet was not about another student or employee, and the place of the speech was not school grounds. Now some might believe I'm saying she was doing it on the bus or on the trip, but what I'm pointing out is that the place of the speech was actually Twitter. Twitter isn't on school grounds. So if she were to be disciplined from something, it couldn't possibly be the content being vulgar. She would have to be punished for tweeting at all from a place it wasn't allowed. And in that case, it's still wrong to have a written apology to the person mentioned in the tweet. It would be like writing something in a notebook on the bus/on trip/ at the school and they telling all your friends at the mall (although obviously that's not a complete analogy as that isn't searchable).

 

[leftysergeant]

To me it seems simply common sense that a teacher who intercepted a note being passed in class which said "**** Darat!" would react differently (and impose a different penalty) than if the note said "LashL is so cute!". For the latter, simply reading the note out loud to the class and embarassing the student would likely be considered adequate punishment; for the former, I can easily imagine the teacher sending the student to the principal's office or assigning detention. And I do not think any principal or school board would criticize the teacher for applying a harsher penalty to the former offense.

Both actions would be disruptive of the class routine. The vulgar remark adds an element of malicious intent, so a harsher punishment is appropriate.

If there was a rule against being disrespectful of guest speakers, then she is guilty of being disrespectful of Brownback.​

The tweet did not disrupt the procedings, so it is none of the principal's concern what she tweeted.

Only if ALL tweets, even to call home for non-emergency purposes, are prohibited has the dork any say in the matter. Weenie boy Brownback has none. It's that simple.

 

[TimCallahan]

Both actions would be disruptive of the class routine. The vulgar remark adds an element of malicious intent, so a harsher punishment is appropriate.

The tweet did not disrupt the procedings, so it is none of the principal's concern what she tweeted.
Only if ALL tweets, even to call home for non-emergency purposes, are prohibited has the dork any say in the matter. Weenie boy Brownback has none. It's that simple.

Agreed. Had she made an outburst, or even had she gone up to Brownback afterward and said, "Hey, governor, you suck!" the school would have had the right to discipline her. They had no right to hassle her over her private political position expressed off-campus.

BTW, is it clear whether or not Brownback was actually involved in any of this; or was it the action of an overzealous staff member, compounded by the school authorities acting like weenies? Perhaps, in this day, when "zero tolerance" drug policies have prompted school authorities to bust high school girls for carrying Midol on their persons during their menstrual periods, all that was needed to set off the school's punitive apparatus was a whine from a staffer.

 

[tyr_13]

It seems that it was just an overzealous staff member, who contacted an overzealous event organizer. Brownback actually apologized for his staffs involvement and on this issue proved very sensible.

 

[Upchurch]

It seems that it was just an overzealous staff member, who contacted an overzealous event organizer. Brownback actually apologized for his staffs involvement and on this issue proved very sensible.

Yes and, as I said earlier, it should be praised. However, that gets buried by people trying to find something to blame the student for in all this. I know people get all offended if you use the word "victim", but that really is what she was in all this. Good for her for standing up to them on this and good on Brownback for calling off the attack dogs. I hope there were strong talks had with the govenor's staff over this.

 

[TragicMonkey]

Yes and, as I said earlier, it should be praised. However, that gets buried by people trying to find something to blame the student for in all this. I know people get all offended if you use the word "victim", but that really is what she was in all this. Good for her for standing up to them on this and good on Brownback for calling off the attack dogs. I hope there were strong talks had with the govenor's staff over this.

It would have been pretty funny if the governor yelled at his staff and they went home and tweeted nasty things about him as a result.