First, and most important this lab top belongs to the school. That is fact. Rules are put into place to avoid this problem. So as an adult I will defend the school. However, the punishment is being the childs grades at risk. The children should play the game (follow the rules) think what they want (it is their right) laugh at the article, say what they want (freedom of speech) but when you put something in black and white for an adult to act like a child...the child will most of the time be wrong. No matter how hard we teach our children, errors are made and poor judgement is made by them. They are children, and most Adults have learn to rise above the childs actions.

However, saying that a person looks like someone else is a matter of opinion, that's all. No racial motivation what so ever!!

Anonymous,
You are correct, that is freedom of speech. Putting something in black and white for the world to see is more then an opinion. But this is also the case of an adult rising above this. Going thru. the channels, pulling the child to the side...working thru. instead of airing this child like act all over the internet themselves.

So if I make my opinion known to everyone then it's not my opinion anymore? It sure is!

You are totally missing the point. Your opinion does matter! If they posted (this teacher looks like Whitney) nothing would have been said or done.

"We do not tolerate at any level any use of technology that we provide for education to be utilized in any way but for education"

What about the students who were punished that became a fan of the page from their home computers?

I see both sides - while the students are only supposed to use the laptops for educational purposes, we all know they dont. They bypass more proxys and firewalls - this is a waste - but that's another story.
If in fact, they can prove that they were posted from their school-issued laptops, then they should be punished, however the 5day suspension was a little much - 5 days detention, ok.
If they can't prove it came from those laptops, then it's freedom of speech. Opinions are allowed........and our children have rights to express those opinions - whether we share them or not, does not make them right or wrong.

I dont think the students that became fans from their home computers should be punished. Again, the statement that the student made was a matter of opinion, I believe. I agree that it was wrong to use the laptop for Facebook, but then practically every student that has a laptop should be punished.... they are all using the laptops for facebook anyway. All I was saying was that I don't feel as though it was a "bias incident".

If the students did post access facebook from their school issued laptop, then they should be punished, but only for violating the AUP. However, if anything post was made after 2:31, when school ends, it is impossible to tell if the comment was posted from a school issued laptop or a student's personal computer, and any punishment in this case is unfair.

Not true because even if it was after school hours and the posts were made on a school issued laptop then it is still within the school's jurisdiction. Even if the school did not feel that the issue was a bias incident, they still are required to pursue the matter because by law they are required to protect their faculty under what their faculty may deem as bias or racial.

My point was that if the posts were made after school hours, there is no way to tell for sure which computer was used to post. With the given punishment, kids who posted from their home computers are facing the same punishment as kids who posted from a school issued computer, when they deserve no punishment at all.

As far as where the posts were posted from, apparently that is a moot point being that no matter where they originate from, the school is required to protect their faculty against what might be considered offensive. These are not rules set forth by Springfield Public Schools Systems but from my understanding the NJSBA (or even possibly an authority higher than that). As far as the details of the rules I am not sure but I know that this is more of an issue of following laws than it was a decision made by any individual in Springfield.

In regards to where the posts did originate, I am pretty sure that the school can check what websites students are accessing as long as they are on the school issued laptops.

From which computer the posts were posted is not a moot point. Devino stated that misusing school issued technology is intolerable and that the people who did so would be punished to the fullest extent, yet the punishment is not bound only to people who misused school issued technology.

And sure, the school can check the computers history to see if facebook had been visited, but they cannot tell from where a specific message was posted.

I don't know anything about the specific laws requiring schools to protect their faculty from racial attacks, but my issue is not with that. It is that the punishment extends to students who may have done anything to deserve it. Do you really think every student who was a fan of the page deserved to be punished by the school, regardless if school rules were broken or not?

eek. The second to last sentence should have read:

It is that the punishment extends to students who may not have done anything to deserve it.

From what I understand everyone who was a fan of the page was NOT punished. In actuality I believe that everyone who was a fan was spoken to by administration but had no disciplinary actions taken against them and it was only certain individuals who did more than just become a fan that were dealt a suspension.

The matter of whether I think they should have been punished or even if I think it was a racist group doesn't really matter because from what I understand these are not school rules that were broken. If this is a law that not just Dayton but every public school has to abide by then I believe that the issues that most of these students think they have with Dayton are really issues with a greater power. If in fact this is the reasoning behind the suspensions and in fact the students did do something wrong whether it be deemed wrong by the NJEA or United States, I think that the question of whether the punishments were just has answered itself.

Each student who was a fan of the facebook page is now forced to attend a mandatory meeting with his/her parents, and the vice principal, as well as follow up counseling sessions. May not be a detention or suspension, but definitely still sounds like punishment to me...

Well if it is determined that they did do something wrong this seems like a pretty simple punishment for the students being that because it is just a meeting and a counseling session it will not show up on any college documentation and will do no harm to them in their future.

The problem is that it was not determined that they have done anything wrong! It doesn't matter how simple or easy the punishment is. If it is impossible to be certain that rules have been broken, then any punishment at all would be inappropriate.

I may have misunderstood your last post but what makes you think that it has not been determined that they have done anything wrong or that it is even impossible to be certain. What I have been saying is that personally I am not sure of it because I do not know all of the rules and laws that school boards are governed by but I would find it very hard to believe that the actions that were taken against these students were taken blindly. I would feel very confident in saying that I am sure the the administration knows what laws and rules they must abide by being that this decision was not made overnight.

I feel like I keep saying the same thing over and over, but here it is again. Every student who was a fan of the page was in some way or another, punished for it. Devino said that the reason kids were punished was because they misused school issued technology. It states clearly in the AUP that the laptops are to be used for educational purposes only. The issue with this is that there is no way for anybody to tell if students became a fan of the facebook page on their school issued laptops or their home computers. Since some students surely became a fan of the page from their own personal computer, the administration's actions punish students who didn't break the rule that they are being accused of.

I'm sure the administration did put much thought into this decision and I'm sure they know their laws and rules very well. Still, There is no way that the majority of students who were punished could have ever been proven guilty of misusing school issued technology. I'm not concerned with the laws or the schools requirement to protect its faculty. I am concerned that the school is unjustly punishing students.

I understand what you have said and though I still feel that their is a way for them to see whether these students did use the school issued laptop, neither of us know for sure the extent to which they can monitor student internet usage, so I guess their is no point to arguing that.

Also, I do understand that you are not concerned with "the laws or the schools requirement to protect its faculty," but whether Devino included this in his statement at the board meeting or not, the laws and rules still play a large role in this issue which is why I have been trying to make is no matter WHAT technology they used, if they did break these rules their is no way that they could have been "unjustly punished" as you claim.

I am completely positive that there is no feasible way for the school, or anyone, to determine which computer was the source of any bit of facebook activity that did not take place on school property during school hours.

Okay but even so the issue (which I understand is not what you are arguing) of the rules and laws is still preventing the concern of unjust punishment.

It is as simple as this: If it can't be proven that a person has broken a rule, then it is unjust to discipline that person.

Whatever outside laws or rules that may or may not play a part here are irrelevant to that. Besides, if the law were the issue here, then I'm not so sure that its the school's responsibility to discipline.

Though I do not want you to have to repeat yourself again, I still do not know why you feel that they cannot prove that they have broken a rule. I fully understand that you say they cannot prove anything on the technology standpoint but if they did break these rules or laws set forth by the NJEA then I believe it is the school's responsibility to discipline.

If they can prove it, then by all means they should. But as of now, they have not, and I am certain that they can not and will not. But if you think they can prove it, then they should, and no punishment should be given until they do.

But until they do, if this is an issue of law pertaining to an event that has not been proven to take place on school property or with school property, then it is not the school's responsibility to give any discipline.

i don't think that the school is handling this correctly. in terms of the law, i feel like if a law was broken we wouldn't be talking about the length of the students' suspensions, we'd be talking about how pathetic it is that they have a court date from this nonsense. if there was no law broken and it was simply school policy, then what is currently happening seems to be a vast misallocation of school resources. In regards to the laptops themselves, the fact that they are used for non-educational purposes is simply a cost of having the laptops for educational purposes. to think that no one will use the laptops for facebook, ichat, aim, text twist, etc. is simply ridiculous and thats all i really care to say on the topic because the "laptop abuse" claims have been circulating ever since the program was approved. At this point, the laptops are a sunk cost so instead I'd rather talk about the misallocation of faculty resources. the school does not have an unlimited labor force. to have mr francis wasting his time on these now mandatory meetings with the students involved is stupid. additionally, there are plenty of students at JDHS with legitimate problems that need to be addressed by mrs sista. for her to have to sit down with students for counselling sessions because the administration decided that a group was racially motivated seems almost depressing. this punishment accomplishes no good, it merely highlights the lack of faith that the students have in the administration

It is definitely wrong what the administration did to the students. The punishment was out of control. The group was comparing one teacher to a public figure and was not intended to be racist. It is also a problem that the town's tax money had to go to paying for the accused to have a private tutor. Instead of a suspension, why wasn't there in school suspension where the students would have still been able to get the education they needed without requiring us to pay? All they got out of the suspension was 5 days of sleeping in, playing video games, and going on Facebook.

The Administation, the child and yes the teacher has been at fault. The child/children should apologize to the Teacher and said Teacher should accept. Instead of plastering this all over the internet so everyone can't see how this is not being handled.

First, you really need to proof read before you post. Second, no apology in the world right now would be accepted, nor should it be given. That child / children.. have lost days in school as well as grades.

We all make mistakes!

First, I would like to commend Brett on a very well written article. Next, I truly feel the punishment meted out was excessive. I understand the school's need to protect the teachers as well as the need for teachers to be respected. However, a five-day suspension is above and beyond what was warranted, as was the need for the counselors to meet with all the kids who were fans of the page. (Perhaps a student assembly would have been more appropriate). While I think the "Aunt Jemima" reference is thoughtless and quite possibly cruel, I'm not certain it rises to the level of "racist". I also agree with Erin's comments that the school cannot prove the comments were posted using school laptops (especially since Facebook is allegedly blocked on all school laptops). Finally, I agree with Jeff - as a parent of a high schooler (who had told me about this incident and was not, thankfully, a fan of the page in question), it is up to us to instill proper values in our children.