<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/">
<channel>
<title>Techdirt. Stories filed under &quot;schools&quot;</title>
<description>Easily digestible tech news...</description>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/</link>
<language>en-us</language>

<item>
<pubDate>Thu, 23 May 2013 10:01:12 PDT</pubDate>
<title>Chicago School System On FOIA Requests: Stonewalling, Obfuscation, &amp; Paper-Shredding</title>
<dc:creator>Timothy Geigner</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130522/09382823173/chicago-school-system-foia-requests-stonewalling-obfuscation-paper-shredding.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130522/09382823173/chicago-school-system-foia-requests-stonewalling-obfuscation-paper-shredding.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ <p>
If you're a government with something to hide, there are plenty of shady ways to handle Freedom of Information Act requests. You can make sure your organization is legally allowed to carry guns and simply refuse, like the <a href="https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130508/18044323015/nypd-chief-ray-kelly-mayor-bloomberg-still-think-privacy-is-good-thing-just-not-your-privacy.shtml">NYPD</a>. You can also make a big deal about how requests are only honored for in-state <a href="https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130429/16265322885/supreme-court-says-out-state-residents-have-no-constitutional-right-to-virginias-foia-law.shtml">residents</a>, as if that were the spirit of the legislation. Or, if you're as big as the <a href="https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130411/13383122682/us-govt-tops-itself-waiting-years-before-responding-to-foia-requests-with-nothing.shtml">federal government</a>, you can play a sort of bureaucratic hackey-sack game with the request for <i>years</i> before releasing the most non-useful information possible. The problem with all of these methods, however, is that they make those using them look petty, but they don't really cement their position in the corrupt jackasses category that I believe all government agencies secretly want to obtain.
<br /><br />
Which is why we'll go to the Chicago city government, since they're the obvious experts in the matter. Here, Rahm Emanuel's administration has taken responding to FOIA requests to a whole new level, not only providing nothing in response to such requests, but then answering questions from the Attorney General with non-responses indicating <a href="http://www.chicagoreader.com/chicago/public-schools-cps-rahm-destroy-public-records/Content?oid=9669704">they might just have proactively destroyed the documents being requested</a>. This story begins with our vaunted public school system, the CPS. Glenn Krell wanted to get his hands on what research had been done when CPS put in a longer school day without bothering to give schools any resources to actually do anything with the extra time.
<blockquote>
<i>Krell figured CPS had done research on the longer school day because, like every parent in the system, he'd received a letter from Jean-Claude Brizard, then the CEO, claiming that "our elementary school students are receiving 22 percent less instruction time than their peers across the country." So he sent CPS a FOIA request asking for "the reports, statistics, comprehensive city-by-city analysis and other documents that back up the statement by Mr. Brizard."</i>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<i>CPS responded that "the district does not maintain any documents responsive to your request."</i>
</blockquote>
Got that? CPS cites a statistic justifying the longer school day, Krell asks for the basis of that statistic, and CPS says there is no document for that. In internet terms, Krell asked for a citation and CPS was unable to provide one. In addition, Krell asked for information on how the city decided to achieve what it calls "selective enforcement tiers", by which high-performing schools are made available to lower-income families as a method for integration. This was another matter about which CPS had indicated its offices were just overflowing with research.
<blockquote>
<i>He knew CPS had lots of information on this matter because he'd read about it in the Tribune. In that article, CPS officials boasted about how they'd left no stone unturned in their effort to make the selection process as fair and objective as possible. They said the process considers data such as home-ownership rates in the students' census tracts and the share of homes where English isn't the primary language.</i>
</blockquote>
The response to that request? CPS claimed there too it had no documents to turn over. But why? Had Brizard and CPS simply made the statistics and research claims up? To find out, Krell appealed to AG Lisa Madigan, which is exactly what the law indicates you're supposed to do if you get a fishy response to a FOIA request. Madigan's office dutifully asked CPS if such documents had never existed, or if they'd simply been destroyed. CPS responded that they had never maintained those records and <b><i>they do not exist.</i></b> The result of that non-answer was for Madigan's office to declare the matter closed.
<br /><br />
And that's a problem, because CPS didn't actually answer the AG's question. They do not answer whether or not the documents <i>ever</i> existed <i>at all</i>, only that they never maintained them and they don't exist currently. One way to achieve that answer is for the research to never have actually been done, which would make CPS liars on multiple items it had addressed to parents and the press. Another way is for those documents to have been proactively destroyed instead of maintained, quite possibly so that they'd never have to be revealed for a FOIA request. Either way, that's crappy government. Add to that Madigan's shirking of her responsibility and it's difficult to take Emmanuel seriously when he claims his administration is "the most open, accountable, and transparent government Chicago has ever seen."
</p><br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130522/09382823173/chicago-school-system-foia-requests-stonewalling-obfuscation-paper-shredding.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130522/09382823173/chicago-school-system-foia-requests-stonewalling-obfuscation-paper-shredding.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130522/09382823173/chicago-school-system-foia-requests-stonewalling-obfuscation-paper-shredding.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>now-you-see-it,-now-you-don't</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20130522/09382823173</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Fri, 29 Mar 2013 05:49:24 PDT</pubDate>
<title>Counter-Strike Map Of School Causes Outrage</title>
<dc:creator>Timothy Geigner</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130326/05410822461/counter-strike-map-school-causes-outrage.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130326/05410822461/counter-strike-map-school-causes-outrage.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ <p>
On the heels of our last story about someone who raised the public's ire over a "real-world" Counter-Strike <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130219/17273422032/make-counterstrike-map-montreal-metro-station-get-threatened-with-50000-fine.shtml">map</a>, it seems these stories may only become more prevalent. This seems particularly likely given that the threat of <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130225/18074022109/despite-threat-50000-fine-montreal-designer-plans-to-release-more-real-world-counter-strike-maps.shtml">legal action</a> doesn't seem to serve much of a deterrance against those that wish to be creative with game maps in this respect. You had to know that this gaming envelope was only going to be pushed further. Such is the way of things. It's something of a one-up culture. In addition, I should note that I tend to think that punishing this kind of creation is generally wrong. It's a game map, nothing more.
<br /><br />
However, I will admit to being heavily conflicted when I came across the story of another Counter-Strike map controversy, this one resulting from the <a href="http://kotaku.com/shocker-counter-strike-map-based-on-local-school-cause-458661483">creation of a map based on a local secondary school</a> in Port Moody, British Columbia. The reaction from the locals upon discovering a <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kk5jZCLGOmg">video</a> of the map on YouTube was, understandably, negative.
<blockquote>
<i>"We have rainbow-colored lockers, and it's our field of dreams... and then to watch the video game, and see people shooting up our field of dreams, it was just so disturbing," Alex Devlin, a teacher at Port Moody Secondary School, told CBC News. "I believe it's just a game, it's not reality... but a lot of kids don't live in reality, right," another local said.</i>
</blockquote>
Let me start off by saying that I get it. Given recent tragedies suffered on the North American continent, I <i>completely</i> understand the discomfort locals, especially parents, might feel discovering a map of their school being built in a game that is all about shooting. I won't begrudge them their animosity. However, I am extremely pleased that cooler heads prevailed in this case.
<br /><br />
The map's creators helped their causes greatly when they <a href="http://pmssmap.tk/">published their own website</a> to respond to their critics. Far from antagonizing, they decided to explain why they had chosen the school to serve as inspiration for their game map.
<blockquote>
<i>The map was this because it's architecture and design is rather ideal for the game's tactics. Furthermore, this is a location we are quite familiar with already. Additionally, supporters and fellow alumni are also likely familiar with this location, which makes it an ideal common ground for this game and its intended audience.</i>
</blockquote>
When you push the admittedly understandable emotional response to the side, their explanation makes a great deal of sense. Local gamers wanting to play a game they love in a <i>fictional</i> representation of a place they know. Once I took a deep breath, I realized that some of the games I love most, and some of those I'm looking forward to the most, feature real locations that I'm familiar with. Any game, for instance, that features the city of Chicago, regardless of the game's genre, is likely going to get a look from me, because I love the idea of playing out a fictional game in the city I love. This is no different, even if the game in question is one that involves weapons and shooting. More importantly, it certainly isn't something that should require legal action. Fortunately, the police in the area agree, saying so in what I would consider to be a surprisingly reasonable response.
<blockquote>
<i>Although the creation of such a video game is likely ill-conceived in the current climate, it does not constitute an offence. Investigators from the Port Moody Police Department have interviewed the developer of this game and have concluded that he does not pose a danger to the staff or students of Port Moody Secondary.</i>
</blockquote>
In the end, that's all that matters. There is no safety concern in making a map of a school for a game. It's just a map.
<br /><br />
</p><br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130326/05410822461/counter-strike-map-school-causes-outrage.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130326/05410822461/counter-strike-map-school-causes-outrage.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130326/05410822461/counter-strike-map-school-causes-outrage.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>conflicted</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20130326/05410822461</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Thu, 7 Mar 2013 13:54:19 PST</pubDate>
<title>7-Year-Old Student Suspended For Waving Around A 'Gun' Made From A Pastry</title>
<dc:creator>Tim Cushing</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130304/16481322196/7-year-old-student-suspended-waving-around-gun-made-pastry.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130304/16481322196/7-year-old-student-suspended-waving-around-gun-made-pastry.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ <p>
So, it's come to this. Oh, wait. I've already used <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130303/18153122181/misheard-will-smith-lyrics-results-arrest-student-district-wide-lockdown.shtml" target="_blank">that opening</a>, back when I thought the pinnacle of guns-n-schools overreaction had been approached, if not actually surmounted. Let's start again.
<br /><br />
So, <i>NOW</i> it's come to this. A seven-year-old suspended from school for crudely fashioning his breakfast pastry into a gun-like shape and <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/education/anne-arundel-second-grader-suspended-for-chewing-his-pastry-into-the-shape-of-a-gun/2013/03/04/44c4bbcc-84c4-11e2-98a3-b3db6b9ac586_story.html?hpid=z4" target="_blank">brandishing it in the most menacing fashion a gun-shaped pastry can be wielded</a>.
<blockquote>
<i>A 7-year-old Anne Arundel County boy was suspended for two days for chewing a breakfast pastry into the shape of a gun and saying, &ldquo;Bang, bang&rdquo;&mdash; an offense the school described as a threat to other students, according to his family.</i>
<br /><br />
<i>The pastry &ldquo;gun&rdquo; was a rectangular strawberry-filled bar, akin to a Pop-Tart, that the second-grader had tried to nibble into the shape of a mountain Friday morning, but then found it looked more like a gun, said his father, William &ldquo;B.J.&rdquo; Welch.</i></blockquote>
Yes. A Pop Tart knockoff makes a handy makeshift weapon, perhaps explaining why pastries are no longer served in prisons. When I say "it's come to this," it really has, but it's been a long time coming and there's plenty of precedent.
<blockquote>
- Feb. 5, 2013 - A ten-year-old Virginia student <a href="http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2013-02-05/local/36758640_1_toy-gun-orange-tip-school-bus" target="_blank">was suspended for bringing an orange-tipped toy gun on a bus</a>.
<br /><br />
- Feb. 1, 2013 - A 9-year-old student was <a href="http://www.newstribune.com/news/2013/feb/01/third-grader-suspended-over-toy-gun-fob/" target="_blank">suspended for bringing a 2-inch toy gun on a key fob to school</a>.
<br /><br />
- Jan. 29, 2013 - A 5-year-old student could be suspended for <a href="http://www.freerangekids.com/school-may-suspend-5-y-o-for-making-a-lego-gun/" target="_blank">crafting a Lego gun during an after-school program</a>. Not only that, but he'd crafted his <i>fingers</i> into a gun mere weeks earlier.
<br /><br />
- Jan. 22, 2013 - A 5-year-old is suspended <a href="http://www.cnn.com/2013/01/21/us/pennsylvania-girl-suspended" target="_blank">for discussing her Hello Kitty bubble gun</a>, saying, "I'll shoot you, you'll shoot me and we'll all play together."
<br /><br />
- Jan. 2, 2013 - A 6-year-old in a Washington D.C. school was <a href="http://www.freerangekids.com/boy-6-suspended-for-making-gun-gesture-with-hand/" target="_blank">suspended for making a gun gesture with his hands</a>.
<br /><br />
- August 28, 2012 - A deaf 3-year-old preschooler is asked to change the sign he uses for his name -- Hunter -- <a href="http://www.1011now.com/home/headlines/Grand-Island-Preschooler-Forbidden-Sign-Language-for-His-Own-Name-167394325.html#.UDv3-z1PhKg.facebook" target="_blank">which he signs by forming a gun with his hands</a>. Apparently, "saying" his name violates the school's weapon policy.
<br /><br />
- Feb. 24, 2012 - A drawing of a gun by a four-year-old resulted in <a href="http://www.therecord.com/news/local/article/676150--schoolgirl-s-father-shocked-by-arrest-on-gun-charge" target="_blank">the arrest of her father when he came to pick her up from school</a>. He was detained by police and strip-searched while his children were questioned by social services. The gun his child depicted? A plastic toy that belonged to his kids.</blockquote>
That's just a sampling. There are many more stories like these out there. There are many that are underreported or never reported, where parents just deal with the ridiculous outcome of zero-tolerance policies. For some reason, many schools still labor under the delusion that "zero tolerance" equals "tough, but fair." It's neither, and utilizing zero tolerance policies simply prunes the whole process back to a disfigured stump devoid of logic, perspective or context.
<br /><br />
So, a child eats something and starts playing with his food because it resembles something other than the RDA-approved Pop Tart knockoff. And his school responds by twisting its own weapons policy into a parody of itself. <a href="http://www.loweringthebar.net/2013/03/update-ii-school-offers-counseling-for-students-troubled-by-pastry-gun-incident.html" target="_blank">The actual wording pertaining to prohibited items</a>, courtesy of Lowering the Bar, reads like this:
<blockquote>
<i>Any gun of any kind, loaded or unloaded, operable or inoperable, including any object other than a firearm which is a look-a-like of a gun. This shall include, but is not limited to, pellet gun, paintball gun, stun gun, taser, BB gun, flare gun, nail gun, and air soft gun.</i></blockquote>
How does this policy apply to the pastry? That's a great question, and Lowering the Bar doesn't have an answer:
<blockquote>
<i>Josh's gun was not a firearm, because it was a pastry, and it seems highly unlikely that it qualified as a gun "look-a-like," again because it was a pastry. It certainly is nothing like any of the "look-a-like" items set forth in the list, largely because those items are not pastries.</i></blockquote>
The school's logic apparently is that if it <i>vaguely resembles</i> a gun and someone is <i>pretending</i> it's a gun, then it's a gun look-a-like. Case closed.
<br /><br />
This, in and of itself, would be pathetic enough. But it gets worse. The school sent home a letter regarding the (non) incident, which hilariously offers the assistance of staff counselors for anyone "troubled" by the weaponized pastry.
<blockquote>
<i>Dear Parents and Guardians:</i>
<br /><br />
<i>I am writing to let you know about an incident that occurred this morning in one of our classrooms and encourage you to discuss this matter with your child in a manner you deem most appropriate.</i>
<br /><br />
<i>During breakfast this morning, one of our students used food to make inappropriate gestures that disrupted the class. While no physical threats were made and no one [was] harmed, the student had to be removed from the classroom.</i>
<br /><br />
<i>* * *</i>
<br /><br />
<i>As you are aware, the ... Code of Student Conduct and appropriate consequences related to violations of the code are clearly spelled out in the Student Handbook, which was sent home during the first week of school and can be found on our website, www.aacps.org....<br /> If your children express that they are troubled by today's incident, please talk with them and help them share their feelings. Our school counselor is available to meet with any students who have the need to do so next week. In general, please remind them of the importance of making good choices.</i></blockquote>
Kevin Underhill at LTB adds:
<blockquote>
<i>Pretty sure that if your children are "troubled" by another kid biting a pastry into something that looks sort of like a gun and waving said pastry around, you have already failed as a parent.</i></blockquote>
And I'd add that if you've done even a merely passable job as a parent, the only "feeling" your children might want to "share" is that their school is run by officious asshats, even if they haven't quite developed the vocabulary to say that in so many words. (Don't kid yourselves, parents: they're quite capable of swearing well above their grade level.)
<br /><br />
This is the nadir of the education system's zero tolerance weapon policies. Zero tolerance does nothing more than relieve the administrative staff from the possibility of having blood on their hands. No situtation is too ridiculous to be taken seriously -- and punished harshly. Reducing every incident to binary ensures that no school employee can ever be held responsible for overreacting to any perceived "threat," no matter how innocuous. In many ways, the education system is a reflection of our current "homeland security" ecosystem where the endless pursuit of "safety" has become the impetus for thousands of terrible policies, all enforced inflexibly.
<br /><br />
There's a way to pull out of this nosedive but it involves many, many people being willing to make judgement calls on the fly and able to face the heat should their judgement falter. Unfortunately for many in the system, the risk is much higher than the reward. For many in these positions, the possibility of being wrong is incapacitating and zero tolerance policies relieve this pressure. Trying to steer the system back towards a greater reliance on common sense won't be easy, but continuing to let it drift in its current direction will do nothing to improve the safety and security of our schools, much less our country.
<br /><br />
<br />
</p><br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130304/16481322196/7-year-old-student-suspended-waving-around-gun-made-pastry.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130304/16481322196/7-year-old-student-suspended-waving-around-gun-made-pastry.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130304/16481322196/7-year-old-student-suspended-waving-around-gun-made-pastry.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>'always-be-a-good-boy/don't-ever-play-with-buns'</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20130304/16481322196</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Tue, 11 Dec 2012 17:00:00 PST</pubDate>
<title>DailyDirt: Educating Adults</title>
<dc:creator>Michael Ho</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20101020/11482611500/dailydirt-educating-adults.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20101020/11482611500/dailydirt-educating-adults.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ Elite schools aren't getting any cheaper, and college tuition seems to be rising <a href="http://blogs.chicagotribune.com/news_columnists_ezorn/2011/03/more-college-tuition-inflation.html">faster</a> than a lot of other goods (though the <a href="http://www.npr.org/blogs/money/2012/05/22/153316565/the-price-of-college-tuition-in-1-graphic">net price</a> may not be). So what are aspiring university students to do? Here are just a few interesting links on the future of education.

<ul>

<li> <a title="http://www.economist.com/blogs/freeexchange/2012/04/education" href="http://econ.st/RfbWgc">One proposal for college students to try to pay for rising tuition fees is for schools to take a cut of their students' future earnings in lieu of upfront tuition.</a> Indentured servitude 2.0 might kill the classical liberal arts education, but oh well. [<a href="http://www.economist.com/blogs/freeexchange/2012/04/education">url</a>]</li>

<li> <a title="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702304708604577505222718048642.html" href="http://on.wsj.com/TPxs7g">Baby boomers might be able to take college-level classes via iPads and chatrooms, but do they really want to?</a> Mobile classes sound useful for students of any age, so why target just the baby boomers? (This exercise left to the reader.) [<a href="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702304708604577505222718048642.html">url</a>]</li>
 
<li> <a title="http://schoolsofthought.blogs.cnn.com/2012/10/04/my-view-the-future-of-credentials/" href="http://bit.ly/THSmFf">Sal Khan discusses the future of credentialing -- and how schools might be separated from the role of providing proof of proficiency.</a> The future of microcredentials could offer a way for anyone to obtain proof of expertise in a narrowly-defined domain. [<a href="http://schoolsofthought.blogs.cnn.com/2012/10/04/my-view-the-future-of-credentials/">url</a>]</li>

</ul>


If you'd like to read more awesome and interesting stuff, check out this unrelated (but not entirely random!) <a title="http://www.stumbleupon.com/to/stumble/stumblethru:www.techdirt.com" href="http://bit.ly/fagV8c">Techdirt post</a>.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20101020/11482611500/dailydirt-educating-adults.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20101020/11482611500/dailydirt-educating-adults.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20101020/11482611500/dailydirt-educating-adults.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>urls-we-dig-up</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20101020/11482611500</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Tue, 27 Nov 2012 05:18:52 PST</pubDate>
<title>Court Temporarily Blocks School District From Suspending Student For Refusing To Wear Student ID/Tracking Device</title>
<dc:creator>Tim Cushing</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20121125/15041521137/court-temporarily-blocks-school-district-suspending-student-refusing-to-wear-student-idtracking-device.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20121125/15041521137/court-temporarily-blocks-school-district-suspending-student-refusing-to-wear-student-idtracking-device.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ A few months back, Tim Geigner covered the story of a Texas school district&#39;s efforts to <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120907/08595920309/rfid-tagging-students-is-all-about-money.shtml" target="_blank">track its students&#39; whereabouts</a> using student ID cards with embedded RFID chips. The district attempted to paint this "students-as-livestock/prisoners" effort as being there for the safety of students and staff. But underneath all the "safety" talk was a large pile of money that the school district hoped to pocket. The so-called "Student Locator" project Texas&#39; Northside Independent School District was implementing put school officials within handout distance of nearly $1.7 million in state government funds.<br />
<br />
Although many students and parents have expressed their displeasure with the new program, it wasn&#39;t until a student at John Jay High School&#39;s Science and Engineering Academy opted out that any punishment had been handed out in connection with the RFID cards. Andrea Hernandez has refused to wear the ID card, citing religious and privacy reasons. In response, the school district has suspended her indefinitely, moving her to another high school in the same district that has not yet implemented the Smart ID policy.<br />
<br />
Despite all the talk about "safety," the school district was <a href="http://thenextweb.com/insider/2012/11/23/judge-temporarily-saves-teenage-girl-facing-suspension-for-refusing-to-wear-rfid-tag-in-school/" target="_blank">more than happy to undercut the entire <i>stated</i> purpose of the Smart ID in order to keep Hernandez and her family from speaking out against the program</a>.
<blockquote>
<i>The school offered a special lanyard with the RFID tag removed, in the hopes to put a damper on the whole situation. The student&rsquo;s father refused the deal, however, because it came with strings attached.</i><br />
<br />
<i>&ldquo;He told me in a meeting that if my daughter would proudly wear her student ID card around her neck so everyone could see, he would be able to quietly remove her chip from her student ID card,&rdquo; Steve Hernandez told WND. &ldquo;He went on to say as part of the accommodation my daughter and I would have to agree to stop criticizing the program and publicly support &hellip; it. I told him that was unacceptable because it would imply an endorsement of the district&rsquo;s policy and my daughter and I should not have to give up our constitutional rights to speak out against a program that we feel is wrong.&rdquo;</i></blockquote>
Apparently, the ID cards are <i>so</i> essential that the school district is willing to suspend a student for <i>not</i> wearing one, but not essential enough that the ID card needs to be fully functioning. Any stated concerns about "safety" are completely laughable if the district is willing to let students wander the school grounds untracked, sporting only plastic badges.<br />
<br />
It&#39;s pathetic that this attempt was even made. The school district&#39;s main concerns seem to be a) having students <i>appear</i> to support the program, b) using the RFID cards to provide proof of attendance in exchange for funding and c) shutting down criticism.<br />
<br />
Unfortunately for the school, <a href="https://www.rutherford.org/publications_resources/on_the_front_lines/victory_court_grants_rutherford_institute_request_to_stop_texas_school_from" target="_blank">the attempted suspension is now on hold</a>.
<blockquote>
<i>The Hernandez family decided to take action against the school with the help of the Rutherford Institute, a civil liberties and human rights group which immediately took the view that the school district is looking for more public funding, which it can only receive if there is proof of positive student attendance rates. Rutherford attorneys filed a petition for the aforementioned TRO, as well as immediate injunctive and declaratory relief alleging that the school&rsquo;s actions violate Hernandez&rsquo;s rights under Texas&rsquo; Religious Freedom Act, the First Amendment, and the Fourteenth Amendment.</i><br />
<br />
<i>&ldquo;The court&rsquo;s willingness to grant a temporary restraining order is a good first step, but there is still a long way to go&mdash;not just in this case, but dealing with the mindset, in general, that everyone needs to be monitored and controlled,&rdquo; John W. Whitehead, president of The Rutherford Institute, said in a statement. While the TRO has been granted, a hearing on the preliminary injunction will take place next week.</i></blockquote>
<a href="https://www.rutherford.org/files_images/general/11-21-2012_TRO-Petition_Hernandez.pdf" target="_blank">The Rutherford Institute&#39;s filing (PDF)</a> states that the district currently has no policy or procedure in place that deals directly with the RFID badges, much less one stating that students can be suspended for failing to wear the new IDs. It also points out that requiring Hernandez to wear a nonfunctioning ID as a "show of support" for the Student Locator Project violates her First Amendment rights by compelling her to convey a message she does not agree with. The filing also claims that the school district&#39;s ID program clearly violates both her Fourteenth Amendment rights as well as Texas Freedom of Religion Act. According to Hernandez, many other students have refused to wear the ID cards, but none of them have been punished to the extent that she is, prompting claims of religious persecution.<br />
<br />
All in all, this doesn&#39;t look good for the school district, which has pushed through an intrusive student surveillance program in order to secure additional government funding. The "safety" of the student body is just the sales pitch. Any supposed "concern" for student safety went out the window, along with the legitimacy of the program, the moment the district offered to remove the tracking chip. The audacity of the district&#39;s actions is breathtaking -- both the implementation of such a controversial program, and its response to this student&#39;s refusal to participate.<br />
<br />
The only other situation in which human beings <i>might</i> need to be constantly surveilled at an individual level is at a maximum security prison. But if you&#39;re willing to treat minors looking for an education like dangerous convicted criminals, there&#39;s no telling what your next "bright idea" might be. Here&#39;s hoping this early effort leads to the entire program being scrapped before it can do any more damage.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20121125/15041521137/court-temporarily-blocks-school-district-suspending-student-refusing-to-wear-student-idtracking-device.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20121125/15041521137/court-temporarily-blocks-school-district-suspending-student-refusing-to-wear-student-idtracking-device.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20121125/15041521137/court-temporarily-blocks-school-district-suspending-student-refusing-to-wear-student-idtracking-device.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>maybe-someone-should-ask-the-administration-to-wear-one-during-the-work-day</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20121125/15041521137</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Fri, 16 Nov 2012 11:34:56 PST</pubDate>
<title>School Administrator Brushes Off 'Constitutional Niceties' Like Fifth Amendment Rights For Students</title>
<dc:creator>Tim Cushing</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20121115/15463021068/school-administrator-brushes-off-constitutional-niceties-like-fifth-amendment-rights-students.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20121115/15463021068/school-administrator-brushes-off-constitutional-niceties-like-fifth-amendment-rights-students.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ For many school administrators, the default mode is to limit the rights of students while enforcing very broadly-worded policies. The default mode may start shifting, though, as more courts are reminding administrators that, while students&#39; rights may be more constrained than those of adults, they&#39;re not nonexistent.<br />
<br />
Recently, a court reminded a Minnesota school district that demanding a <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120913/19485120378/demanding-students-facebook-password-violation-first-amendment-rights-judge-says.shtml" target="_blank">student&#39;s Facebook password</a> was a violation of her First <i>and</i> Fourth Amendment rights. The judge stated:
<blockquote>
<i>For more than forty years, the United States courts have recognized that students do not check their First Amendment rights at the schoolhouse door.</i></blockquote>
In an on-going case in Kentucky, the state supreme court is trying to <a href="http://nky.cincinnati.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/AB/20121114/NEWS0103/311140029/" target="_blank">determine whether students are entitled to Fifth and Sixth Amendment protections</a>, specifically those related to "Miranda rights." (via <a href="http://reason.com/blog/2012/11/14/do-your-miranda-rights-stop-at-the-schoo" target="_blank">Reason</a>)
<blockquote>
<i>The Kentucky Supreme Court is considering a case from Nelson County that could require school officials to give the Miranda warning &ndash; You have the right to remain silent. Anything you say can and will be used against you ... &ndash; when questioning a student with a school resource officer present.</i><br />
<br />
<i>Miranda warnings are required when a subject is in custody &ndash; when a suspect thinks he&rsquo;s not free to leave &ndash; and at issue is whether a student grilled in the principal&rsquo;s office inherently fits that description.</i></blockquote>
This is an interesting question. Students being detained in principals&#39; offices are generally granted "release" at the discretion of the administrator. It&#39;s certainly not a formal detainment, like being placed in a holding cell, but it certainly isn&#39;t optional either. The U.S. Supreme Court has said that a person is in custody when "the circumstances would lead a reasonable person to conclude he was not free to leave." This would seem to be the normal conclusion a student would draw from a mandatory visit to the principal&#39;s office.
<blockquote>
<i>In a brief for N.C., assistant public advocate Robert Strong says that when a student is sent to the principal&rsquo;s office, &ldquo;He is not allowed to leave until the principal says so.&rdquo; In other words, a reasonable student would conclude he was in custody, &ldquo;given the coercive nature of the principal&rsquo;s office,&rdquo; Strong says.</i></blockquote>
This case sprung out of an incident at a Nelson County school in which a student gave another student some prescription painkillers. The "school resource officer" (actually an armed deputy sheriff) charged the student with illegally dispensing a controlled substance. The student was sentenced in a juvenile court to 45 days in an <i>adult</i> prison (?). His appeal (which was denied) argued that his statement should have been suppressed because he wasn&#39;t read his Miranda rights before being questioned.<br />
<br />
There&#39;s actually some related precedent for this case. The U.S. Supreme Court handed down a ruling on students and Miranda warnings last year in a case from North Carolina, stating that the student&#39;s age must be considered when determining whether they have a right to a Miranda warning.
<blockquote>
<i>The facts of that case, in which a 13-year-old was interviewed by police at school about a series of neighborhood thefts, were &ldquo;eerily&rdquo; similar to N.C.&rsquo;s case, Strong said. The boy was escorted by an armed school resource officer to an office, where he was interviewed by the officer with an assistant principal present. Neither gave him a Miranda warning.</i><br />
<br />
<i>The U.S. Supreme Court noted the purpose behind Miranda is to keep subjects from being coerced into giving false confessions, to which children are particularly prone. &ldquo;A reasonable child subjected to police questioning will sometimes feel pressured to submit when a reasonable adult would feel free to go,&rdquo; Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote for the court.</i></blockquote>
Most students are probably unaware of their rights and administrators seem mostly unwilling to pass on that information. It&#39;s easier for adminstration if the students operate under the assumption that their rights are limited to whatever the school policies grant them. When students are being interrogated like suspected criminals, with an armed officer present, it would seem they should be granted the same rights as other criminals (especially if the end result is a stay at an <i>adult</i>&nbsp;prison) and be given a Miranda warning before any questioning occurs. This seems like the least the school could do. But, as statements by the administration director show, the district has no interest in granting students these rights.
<blockquote>
<i>Simple investigations would be hamstrung and schools would be less safe if principals, every time they question a student, &ldquo;must look into a crystal ball and predict, &lsquo;This could lead to criminal charges, I have to Mirandize this child,&rsquo; &rdquo; said Wayne Young, executive director of the Kentucky Association of School Administrators.</i></blockquote>
If you&#39;re bringing an armed member of law enforcement into the room, it would seem that you&#39;ve already made that determination, or have gathered enough evidence to warrant their presence. But schools with law enforcement on staff have been known to bring them along for nearly any reason, possible criminal offense or no. The case mentioned above dealt with some supposedly "bullying" statements made on Facebook about a member of the school&#39;s staff and that interrogation involved <i>three</i> members of administration <i>and</i> a law enforcement officer armed with a taser. To handle&nbsp;<i>one</i> teenage girl.<br />
<br />
And as for the feeling that "simple investigations" would be "hamstrung" by the Miranda warning? Too bad. The police have to do it and their investigations usually concern something more threatening to safety than Facebook status updates and painkiller distribution.<br />
<br />
Young isn&#39;t done, though. He takes the same hardline many in law enforcement and various intelligence agencies do. Alleged criminals don&#39;t deserve rights.
<blockquote>
<i>&ldquo;If a crime is being committed in school, if somebody is handing out pain medication, <b>I don&rsquo;t think we should be troubled with constitutional niceties</b>.&rdquo;</i><br />
<br />
<i>He said courts have given schools leeway on student free-speech issues and searches, which don&rsquo;t require warrants in schools, because of the importance of maintaining safety and order on campus. &ldquo;The goal is to protect all children, and it doesn&rsquo;t bother me if a child&rsquo;s constitutional protections are limited, if it is to protect all children,&rdquo; he said.</i></blockquote>
That&#39;s the same excuse used by everyone from the local school to the NSA: "safety" trumps "constitutional protections." The fact that Young refers to Constitutional rights as "niceties" reveals the condescending and dismissive attitude he has for those under his control. It&#39;s little wonder he believes that students shouldn&#39;t be read the Miranda warning, as "niceties" like the Fifth and Sixth Amendment simply get in the way of "safety" and "order." (Without Godwin-ing anything, it&#39;s a bit chilling to hear someone openly value "order" over "personal freedoms.")<br />
<br />
Young&#39;s fears that apprising students of their Miranda rights will upset order or compromise safety are irrational. Paul Holland, dean at Seattle University Law and a Youth Advocacy Clinic instructor, believes that if school administration is going to collaborate with law enforcement when questioning students, they should "err on the side of advising students of their rights."
<blockquote>
<i>Holland said the fear that safety would be compromised is ill-founded because the Miranda doctrine already contains an exception when there is an imminent threat &ndash; such as for questions about the existence or location of weapons on school grounds.</i><br />
<br />
<i>Even if a student&rsquo;s answers are suppressed because of a Miranda violation and couldn&rsquo;t be used in a criminal case, they still could be used to suspend or expel a student, he points out in &ldquo;Schooling Miranda: Policing Interrogation in the 21st Century Schoolhouse.&rdquo;</i><br />
<br />
<i>It is also likely that most students will waive their right to remain silent or to an attorney, he said. &ldquo;Thus, the amount of information lost to Miranda would be slight.&rdquo;</i></blockquote>
Advising students of their Miranda rights is granting them a modicum of control, something Nelson County&#39;s administrators seem loathe to do. This sort of atmosphere pervades many school districts, thanks to overreaching anti-bullying policies and a general push for greater control of every aspect of their students&#39; actions, on or <i>off</i>&nbsp;campus. If <i>actual</i> dangerous suspects are granted this right, however begrudgingly, why is it such a problem to extend it to students?<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20121115/15463021068/school-administrator-brushes-off-constitutional-niceties-like-fifth-amendment-rights-students.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20121115/15463021068/school-administrator-brushes-off-constitutional-niceties-like-fifth-amendment-rights-students.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20121115/15463021068/school-administrator-brushes-off-constitutional-niceties-like-fifth-amendment-rights-students.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>granting-rights-means-ceding-control----can't-have-that</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20121115/15463021068</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Fri, 31 Aug 2012 18:31:00 PDT</pubDate>
<title>Common Sense For School Internet Safety Policies</title>
<dc:creator>Tim Cushing</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120824/18261220156/common-sense-school-internet-safety-policies.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120824/18261220156/common-sense-school-internet-safety-policies.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ We talk quite a bit here about the growing pains of various institutions when faced with upstarts like <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120521/18221319009/chelsea-clinton-we-must-protect-children-internet.shtml" target="_blank">the internet</a> and <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20081210/0238423070.shtml" target="_blank">social media</a>. The usual suspects like the recording industry and newpapers come to mind first, but one of our oldest institutions continues to painfully stumble its way into the future: the educational system.<br />
<br />
The institution&#39;s deep-seated mistrust of the most used encyclopedia in the world is already well known. But as email has given way to texting and social networks have expanded past the confines of the schoolyard, those seeking to somehow control the seeming chaos have worked steadily to bang out <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120301/04472217925/teaching-style-not-computers-appears-to-be-biggest-factor-classroom-distraction.shtml" target="_blank">reactionary policies</a> and ever-tightening guidelines. Rather than temper their actions with some common sense or a bit of perspective, educators (and some parent groups) have often decided to deploy terrible "zero tolerance" policies or overly-broad "guidelines," relying on a variety of <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110715/11131015108/inevitability-techno-moral-panics-think-children.shtml" target="_blank">tech-related boogiemen</a> (<a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090403/1038214382.shtml" target="_blank">online predators</a>, <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20081217/0911053155.shtml" target="_blank">cyberbullying</a>, <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090403/1934134386.shtml" target="_blank">sexting</a>, <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120321/14022718188/parent-claims-enders-game-is-pornographic-teacher-who-read-it-to-students-put-temporary-leave.shtml" target="_blank">porn</a>... um... <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090507/0301404777.shtml" target="_blank">Wikipedia vandals</a>?) to keep questions to a minimum.<br />
<br />
Fortunately, someone is actually attempting to inject some common sense into school internet safety policies, tackling many of the issues that seem to go hand-in-hand with attempting to provide analog guidance in a digital era. <a href="http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2012/08/internet_safety.html" target="_blank">Via Bruce Schneier</a> comes "<a href="http://dangerouslyirrelevant.org/2012/08/26-internet-safety-talking-points.html" target="_blank">26 Internet Safety Talking Points</a>," compiled by Scott McLeod at Dangerously Irrelevant.<br />
<br />
McLeod, founder of the UCEA Center for the Advanced Study of Technology Leadership in Education (<a href="http://schooltechleadership.org/" target="_blank">CASTLE</a>), runs through the whole alphabet (and adds a few corollaries) detailing talking points he uses when discussing internet safety with principals and superintendents. The entire piece is definitely worth reading. Here&#39;s a few selections from McLeod&#39;s list.<br />
<br />
First off, bad things will happen. But it&#39;s not the tool being used. It&#39;s the user.
<blockquote>
<i>C. Mobile phones, Facebook, Wikipedia, YouTube, blogs, Wikispaces, Google, and whatever other technologies you&rsquo;re blocking are not inherently evil. Stop demonizing them and focus on people&rsquo;s behavior, not the tools, particularly when it comes to making policy.</i></blockquote>
In addition to school administrators, members of our government and various security agencies should be presented with a copy of this talking point.
<blockquote>
<i>F. You never can promise 100% safety. For instance, you never would promise a parent that her child would never, ever be in a fight at school. So quit trying to guarantee 100% safety when it comes to technology. Provide reasonable supervision, implement reasonable procedures and policies, and move on.</i></blockquote>
Another thing our government and its affiliated agencies do well: use fear to acquire and maintain control.
<blockquote>
<i>G. The &lsquo;online predators will prey on your schoolchildren&rsquo; argument is a false bogeyman, a scare tactic that is fed to us by the media, politicians, law enforcement, and computer security vendors. The number of reported incidents in the news of this occurring is zero.</i></blockquote>
There&#39;s a lot of buck-passing and "our hands are tied" gestures made when these policies are questioned. Often, it&#39;s simply not true.
<blockquote>
<i>H. Federal laws do not require your draconian filtering. You can&rsquo;t point the finger somewhere else. You have to own it yourself.</i></blockquote>
This should be obvious. You&#39;re educators, after all.
<blockquote>
<i>K. There&rsquo;s a difference between a teachable moment and a punishable moment. Lean toward the former as much as possible.</i></blockquote>
What&nbsp;<i>is</i> the rationale behind policies like this? That if it&#39;s online, it&#39;s automatically inappropriate? It&#39;s such an obvious double standard and yet, it&#39;s deployed <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110915/17114015973/missouri-senate-backs-down-says-its-okay-teachers-to-friend-students-facebook.shtml" target="_blank">so often</a>.
<blockquote>
<i>N. If you&rsquo;re prohibiting teachers from being &lsquo;friends&rsquo; with students online, are you also prohibiting them from being &lsquo;friends&rsquo; with students in neighborhoods, at church, in volunteer organizations, at the mall, and in other non-school settings?</i></blockquote>
Streisand.
<blockquote>
<i>S. Unless you like losing lawsuits, remember that students and staff have speech and privacy rights, particularly off-campus. Remember that any dumb decision you make is Internet fodder and has a good chance of going viral online. Do you really want to be the next stupid administrator story on The Huffington Post?</i></blockquote>
The more you block, the more energy gets expended by attempts at circumvention. Wouldn&#39;t you rather focus this energy on something positive, rather than trying to extinguish every flame you see?&nbsp;
<blockquote>
<i>Z. Educating is always, always more powerful than blocking.</i></blockquote>
This the correct way to "think about the children." A list like this is a handy thing to keep close at hand for the inevitable moment when school adminstrators declare "something must be done. " Tossing a little common sense cold water on heated, reactionary plans is always a good idea.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120824/18261220156/common-sense-school-internet-safety-policies.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120824/18261220156/common-sense-school-internet-safety-policies.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120824/18261220156/common-sense-school-internet-safety-policies.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>less-irrational-fear,-more-education</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20120824/18261220156</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Tue, 24 Apr 2012 17:00:00 PDT</pubDate>
<title>DailyDirt: Wuzzle Means To Mix. Sculch Is Junk. Alate Means To Have Wings. A Baloo Is A Bear....</title>
<dc:creator>Michael Ho</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100422/0944349140/dailydirt-wuzzle-means-to-mix-sculch-is-junk-alate-means-to-have-wings-baloo-is-bear.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100422/0944349140/dailydirt-wuzzle-means-to-mix-sculch-is-junk-alate-means-to-have-wings-baloo-is-bear.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ There are a lot of standardized tests for kids to take, but it's not always clear what the results of the tests actually mean. If society wants to create a huge population of adults who can memorize some facts or fill out circles with no.2 pencils, then we're doing a pretty good job of it. Here are a few links that question the usefulness of certain kinds of tests.

<ul>
<li> <a title="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702303513404577356113609677208.html" href="http://on.wsj.com/JTiabS">The New York state Education Department recently threw out standardized test questions related to a nonsensical story about talking animals and a sleeveless pineapple.</a> Apparently, a lot of 8th graders were confused about the moral of <a href="http://usny.nysed.gov/docs/the-hare-and-the-pineapple.pdf">this story</a>, but the larger lesson might be that standardized tests shouldn't be taken too seriously. [<a href="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702303513404577356113609677208.html">url</a>]</li>

<li> <a title="http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/18/magazine/what-if-the-secret-to-success-is-failure.html?pagewanted=all" href="http://nyti.ms/JtTTyk">The headmaster of one of NYC's top private schools (Riverdale) doesn't have a high opinion of standardized IQ tests for admissions.</a> "This push on tests ... is missing out on some serious parts of what it means to be a successful human."  [<a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/18/magazine/what-if-the-secret-to-success-is-failure.html?pagewanted=all">url</a>]</li>

<li> <a title="http://thehappyscientist.com/blog/problems-floridas-science-fcat-test" href="http://bit.ly/I7r4H3">In Florida, it looks like 5th graders are getting their answers marked wrong even when they're correct.</a> Science is so subjective these days. [<a href="http://thehappyscientist.com/blog/problems-floridas-science-fcat-test">url</a>]</li>

<li> <a title="http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-sheet/post/ravitch-why-finlands-schools-are-great-by-doing-what-we-dont/2011/10/12/gIQAmTyLgL_blog.html" href="http://wapo.st/IkuVLx">Finnish schools don't administer standardized tests until the last year of high school, but somehow Finnish students seem to do well on the PISA (Program for International Student Assessment) exams.</a> Is there something to be learned from the Finnish school system? [<a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-sheet/post/ravitch-why-finlands-schools-are-great-by-doing-what-we-dont/2011/10/12/gIQAmTyLgL_blog.html">url</a>]</li>

<li><b>To discover more interesting education-related content, <a title="http://www.stumbleupon.com/to/stumble/topic:223" href="http://bit.ly/gPWAV6">check out what's currently floating around the StumbleUpon universe.</a></b> [<a href="http://www.stumbleupon.com/to/stumble/topic:Technology">url</a>]  <a title="what's this?" href="#" class="whatsthis help_ddstumble">&nbsp;</a>
</li>
</ul> 

By the way, StumbleUpon can recommend some good <a title="http://www.stumbleupon.com/to/stumble/stumblethru:www.techdirt.com" href="http://bit.ly/fagV8c">Techdirt</a> articles, too.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100422/0944349140/dailydirt-wuzzle-means-to-mix-sculch-is-junk-alate-means-to-have-wings-baloo-is-bear.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100422/0944349140/dailydirt-wuzzle-means-to-mix-sculch-is-junk-alate-means-to-have-wings-baloo-is-bear.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100422/0944349140/dailydirt-wuzzle-means-to-mix-sculch-is-junk-alate-means-to-have-wings-baloo-is-bear.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>urls-we-dig-up</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20100422/0944349140</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Mon, 26 Mar 2012 14:27:00 PDT</pubDate>
<title>High School Student Expelled For Tweeting Profanity; Principal Admits School Tracks All Tweets</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120326/04334818242/high-school-student-expelled-tweeting-profanity-principal-admits-school-tracks-all-tweets.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120326/04334818242/high-school-student-expelled-tweeting-profanity-principal-admits-school-tracks-all-tweets.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tinker_v._Des_Moines_Independent_Community_School_District" target="_blank">Tinker v. Des Moines</a> is considered a key lawsuit in defining the free speech rights of students.  While there <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bethel_School_District_v._Fraser" target="_blank">have</a> been <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hazelwood_v._Kuhlmeier" target="_blank">a few</a> cases that <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morse_v._Frederick" target="_blank">limited</a> the ruling, it's still seen as the key case in establishing that students have First Amendment rights and that schools can't just arbitrarily shut them down.
<br /><br />
I'm reminded of all this after hearing that a student, Austin Carroll at Garrett High School in Garrett, Indiana, <a href="http://www.indianasnewscenter.com/news/local/High-School-Senior-Expelled-For-Tweeting-Profanity---144022966.html" target="_blank">was expelled from the school for a silly tweet</a> that used the word "fuck" repeatedly.  Supposedly he tweeted something along the lines of "Fuck is one of the fucking words you can fucking put anywhere in a fucking sentence and still fucking makes sense."  A little juvenile, but he's in high school.  He insists that he tweeted this from home, but the school insisted that it was done at school.  But the details suggest the tweet <a href="http://www.journalgazette.net/article/20120325/LOCAL0201/303259931" target="_blank">came at 2:30am</a> when he was definitely <i>not</i> at school.
<br /><br />
What's coming out, however, is that the school was apparently spying on how students use Twitter:
<blockquote><i>
The principal at Garrett High School claims their system tracks all the tweets on Twitter when a student logs in, meaning even if he did tweet it from home their system could have recognized it when he logged in again at school. 
</i></blockquote>
I'm not entirely sure what they mean here by it "could have recognized it when he logged in again at school," but it seems clear that the school was aggressively monitoring social networking activity, and chose to expel the kid because of his decision to express himself.  It sounds like Austin isn't fighting the expulsion, but simply found an alternative school to complete his last few months and get his diploma, but that's pretty ridiculous.  I don't see how the school has a legitimate argument for expulsion here as it appears to violate his basic First Amendment rights.  Even beyond that, though, it's really pretty shameful what the school is teaching its students.  Spying on students and punishing them for expressing themselves gives exactly the wrong kind of message to students.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120326/04334818242/high-school-student-expelled-tweeting-profanity-principal-admits-school-tracks-all-tweets.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120326/04334818242/high-school-student-expelled-tweeting-profanity-principal-admits-school-tracks-all-tweets.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120326/04334818242/high-school-student-expelled-tweeting-profanity-principal-admits-school-tracks-all-tweets.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>hello-free-speech-rights</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20120326/04334818242</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Tue, 1 Nov 2011 07:14:23 PDT</pubDate>
<title>Germany To Put Special Monitoring Software On School Computers To Search For Infringement</title>
<dc:creator>Glyn Moody</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20111031/13205016572/germany-to-put-special-monitoring-software-school-computers-to-search-infringement.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20111031/13205016572/germany-to-put-special-monitoring-software-school-computers-to-search-infringement.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ <p>Just under a month ago, the "Chaos Computer Club" (CCC), which styles itself as "the largest European hacker club", had <a href="http://www.ccc.de/en/updates/2011/staatstrojaner">some disturbing news for Germans</a>:

<i><blockquote>The largest European hacker club, "Chaos Computer Club" (CCC), has reverse engineered and analyzed a "lawful interception" malware program used by German police forces. It has been found in the wild and submitted to the CCC anonymously. The malware can not only siphon away intimate data but also offers a remote control or backdoor functionality for uploading and executing arbitrary other programs. Significant design and implementation flaws make all of the functionality available to anyone on the internet.</blockquote></i>

Since then, a debate has raged about <a href="http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/0,1518,792276,00.html">the extent to which these technologies are permitted by German law</a> when tackling crime.  But now it seems that such electronic spying is being institutionalized further thanks to a deal between the Culture Ministers of the German States and publishers of educational materials that allows <a href="http://netzpolitik.org/2011/der-schultrojaner-eine-neue-innovation-der-verlage/">school computers to be searched annually for unauthorised copies</a> (post in German on Netzpolitik.org):

<i><blockquote>There it has been contractually agreed that 1% of school computers [in Germany] shall be investigated with the help of a "school trojan" for "plagiarism", by which is meant copyright infringement.</blockquote></i>

Nor is this some mere statistical exercise: there will be real consequences for school authorities and teachers accused of having unauthorized copies:

<i><blockquote>"Upon notice of infractions against this contract's conditions for the reproduction of copyright-protected works, the German States undertake to institute disciplinary measures against the school management and teaching staff involved."  Civil and criminal claims of rights-holders naturally remain intact. This then represents a further sanction if, with the help of this sniffer software, teachers are caught copying.<blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></i>

Although the spyware has not yet been introduced, the contract was signed last December and came into force in January this year.    It is yet another example of politicians and their advisers agreeing to what look like <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20111021/11554216450/eu-politician-wants-internet-surveillance-built-into-every-operating-system.shtml">easy technical fixes</a> to issues, but not thinking through the consequences.  
</p><p>
As the Netzpolitik.org article asks: who will be responsible for ensuring that the spy software does its job without breaking the German data protection laws?  Has anyone thought about the security issues of introducing this software into schools?  Will the software work on all platforms  - and if it doesn't, what happens to schools using Macs or GNU/Linux?
</p><p>
Even leaving aside such issues, you have to wonder what on earth the German States' Culture Ministers were thinking when they agreed to allow this gross invasion of privacy of teachers and students.  Perhaps they hoped that the fuss would all blow over after a while; in the wake of the other revelations about the German government spying on its citizens through software on their computers, that seems unlikely now.
</p><p>
Follow me @glynmoody on <a href="http://twitter.com/glynmoody">Twitter</a> or <a href="http://identi.ca/glynmoody">identi.ca</a>, and on <a href="https://plus.google.com/100647702320088380533">Google+</a> </p><br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20111031/13205016572/germany-to-put-special-monitoring-software-school-computers-to-search-infringement.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20111031/13205016572/germany-to-put-special-monitoring-software-school-computers-to-search-infringement.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20111031/13205016572/germany-to-put-special-monitoring-software-school-computers-to-search-infringement.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>preserving-monopolies-at-any-cost</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20111031/13205016572</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Wed, 7 Sep 2011 17:00:00 PDT</pubDate>
<title>DailyDirt: Back To School Time...</title>
<dc:creator>Michael Ho</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110823/18431815641/dailydirt-back-to-school-time.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110823/18431815641/dailydirt-back-to-school-time.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ It's that time of year again -- time for kids in the US to go back to school after a summer break. There are plenty of folks who argue that summer breaks are unnecessary and waste valuable teaching time. There also seems to be no end of suggestions on how to fix the US education system. Here are just a few more opinions about improving educational systems.
<ul>
<li> <a title="http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/25/opinion/how-to-fix-our-math-education.html" href="http://nyti.ms/qMndfJ">Would students be better served by taking "applied math" classes instead of pre-algebra, algebra, pre-calculus and calculus?</a> Mothers, don't let your babies grow up to be cowboys, engineers or scientists... [<a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/25/opinion/how-to-fix-our-math-education.html">url</a>]</li>
<li> <a title="http://gigaom.com/2011/08/29/eric-schmidt-challenges-teachers-get-with-the-program/" href="http://bit.ly/psq23a">Google's Eric Schmidt admonishes British teachers for teaching students how to use Microsoft applications -- instead of programming.</a> Out of spite, how about we teach kids how to use Microsoft Visual C++? [<a href="http://gigaom.com/2011/08/29/eric-schmidt-challenges-teachers-get-with-the-program/">url</a>]</li>
<li> <a title="http://mobile.salon.com/life/feature/2011/08/29/confessions_of_a_bad_teacher" href="http://bit.ly/qZva6E">Teachers have a hard job in NYC... and it doesn't help when it's so easy for new teachers to be dismissed as bad teachers.</a> But it's not easy to grade teachers, either. [<a href="http://mobile.salon.com/life/feature/2011/08/29/confessions_of_a_bad_teacher">url</a>]</li>
<li> <a title="http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/03/opinion/blow-an-ode-to-teachers.html" href="http://nyti.ms/nC124a">Teaching as a career doesn't seem to be a highly-regarded profession, according to several polls.</a> But it's not clear how the trend of diminishing status for teaching professionals can be reversed. [<a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/03/opinion/blow-an-ode-to-teachers.html">url</a>]</li>
<li><b>To discover more interesting education-related content, <a title="http://www.stumbleupon.com/to/stumble/topic:223" href="http://bit.ly/gPWAV6">check out what's currently floating around the StumbleUpon universe.</a></b> [<a href="http://www.stumbleupon.com/to/stumble/topic:Technology">url</a>]  <a title="what's this?" href="#" class="whatsthis help_ddstumble">&nbsp;</a>
</li>
</ul> 

By the way, StumbleUpon can recommend some good <a title="http://www.stumbleupon.com/to/stumble/stumblethru:www.techdirt.com" href="http://bit.ly/fagV8c">Techdirt</a> articles, too.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110823/18431815641/dailydirt-back-to-school-time.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110823/18431815641/dailydirt-back-to-school-time.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110823/18431815641/dailydirt-back-to-school-time.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>urls-we-dig-up</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20110823/18431815641</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Tue, 16 Aug 2011 17:00:00 PDT</pubDate>
<title>DailyDirt: Can Education Ever Be One-Size-Fits-All?</title>
<dc:creator>Michael Ho</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110726/18175915271/dailydirt-can-education-ever-be-one-size-fits-all.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110726/18175915271/dailydirt-can-education-ever-be-one-size-fits-all.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ The national debate over education in the US seems to be gaining more steam. Part of the issue is that funding for education is at a crossroads, and decisions about how to best allocate funds need to be made soon. There don't seem to be any clear solutions so far, but there are plenty of opinions. Here are just a few.
<ul>
<li> <a title="http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/08/education/08educ.html" href="http://nyti.ms/qxisGG">No Child Left Behind is about to be ousted, as many states are facing far less than 100% proficiency in math and reading skills by 2014.</a> I can haz education, 2? [<a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/08/education/08educ.html">url</a>]</li>
<li> <a title="http://articles.latimes.com/2011/jul/31/opinion/la-oe-herman-class-size-20110731" href="http://lat.ms/q5ViYf">"<i>The best thing you can do is get children in front of an extraordinary teacher.</i>"</a> There might be a <i>ceteris paribus</i> missing from that statement. [<a href="http://articles.latimes.com/2011/jul/31/opinion/la-oe-herman-class-size-20110731">url</a>]</li>
<li> <a title="http://mobile.salon.com/life/feature/2011/08/06/good_school_excerpt" href="http://bit.ly/nmnZdN">Smaller class sizes don't seem to necessarily mean kids will learn more...</a> But that doesn't mean class size doesn't matter at all. [<a href="http://mobile.salon.com/life/feature/2011/08/06/good_school_excerpt">url</a>]</li>
<li><b>To discover more interesting education-related content, <a title="http://www.stumbleupon.com/to/stumble/topic:223" href="http://bit.ly/gPWAV6">check out what's currently floating around the StumbleUpon universe.</a></b> [<a href="http://www.stumbleupon.com/to/stumble/topic:Technology">url</a>]  <a title="what's this?" href="#" class="whatsthis help_ddstumble">&nbsp;</a>
</li>
</ul> 

By the way, StumbleUpon can recommend some good <a title="http://www.stumbleupon.com/to/stumble/stumblethru:www.techdirt.com" href="http://bit.ly/fagV8c">Techdirt</a> articles, too.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110726/18175915271/dailydirt-can-education-ever-be-one-size-fits-all.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110726/18175915271/dailydirt-can-education-ever-be-one-size-fits-all.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110726/18175915271/dailydirt-can-education-ever-be-one-size-fits-all.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>urls-we-dig-up</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20110726/18175915271</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Tue, 14 Jun 2011 08:36:09 PDT</pubDate>
<title>Dumb Arguments: AT&#038;T - T-Mobile Merger Would Be Good For The Children</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/blog/wireless/articles/20110613/01564514667/dumb-arguments-att---t-mobile-merger-would-be-good-children.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/blog/wireless/articles/20110613/01564514667/dumb-arguments-att---t-mobile-merger-would-be-good-children.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ In the typical push to get big mergers approved, we often see particularly dumb arguments.  Sometimes these involve astroturfing attempts or lobbyists <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080611/1735371380.shtml">signing arguments</a> for others (or sometimes <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110210/12363113040/lobbyists-forge-letters-to-pretend-theres-grassroots-interest-derivatives-reform.shtml">forging</a> the letters entirely).  And then, sometimes, the companies just get people to push crazy arguments on the off chance that someone might believe them.  Take, for example, this absolutely bizarre claim from the executive director of the Texas Rural Education Association, Don Rogers, that <a href="http://www.statesman.com/opinion/rogers-at-t-tmobile-merger-would-be-good-1534501.html" target="_blank">allowing AT&#038;T to buy T-Mobile would be good for Texas schools</a>:
<blockquote><i>
The proposed merger between AT&#038;T and T-Mobile will be a giant stride toward providing ALL Texas children quality educational opportunities and experiences. Every Texas student, whether they attend school in inner-city Houston or in rural West Texas, should have access to modern technological advancements, including high-speed wireless Internet.
<br /><br />
The resources made available by the merger would make high-speed wireless available to many Texans, both rural and urban. This is vitally important for schools in rural Texas that will finally have the ability to access a high-speed wireless broadband network and all it brings.
</i></blockquote>
He doesn't explain much further.  He does explain the importance of wireless broadband, which is great, and we agree that there should be more of it, especially for schools.  But what does allowing AT&#038;T and T-Mobile to merge have to do with that at all?  The real answer is nothing whatsoever.  Nothing in the merger will make it any more or less likely that Texas schools will get mobile broadband.  But, Rogers is sure of it:
<blockquote><i>
I know of what I speak when I say that Texas--in particular our rural schools--will benefit substantially from this merger. To deny the educational opportunities this merger would provide to students living in rural areas would do our children a disservice. This merger will ensure that every young Texan will be learning and performing to the best of their abilities.
</i></blockquote>
I know of what I speak when I say the above is pure hogwash.  Whether or not you think the merger makes sense, it has <i>nothing</i> whatsoever to do with broadband in schools.  And it certainly would not "ensure" that "every young Texan will be learning and performing to the best of their abilities."  It's incredibly disingenuous for someone supposedly heavily involved in children's education to suggest that some totally unrelated corporate merger will somehow "ensure" that kids are learning to the best of their abilities.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/blog/wireless/articles/20110613/01564514667/dumb-arguments-att---t-mobile-merger-would-be-good-children.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/blog/wireless/articles/20110613/01564514667/dumb-arguments-att---t-mobile-merger-would-be-good-children.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/blog/wireless/articles/20110613/01564514667/dumb-arguments-att---t-mobile-merger-would-be-good-children.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>say-what-now?</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20110613/01564514667</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Tue, 12 Oct 2010 13:53:23 PDT</pubDate>
<title>Spying School District Pays Out $610,000 To Settle Lawsuit -- Mostly To The Lawyers</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20101012/10365311390/spying-school-district-pays-out-610-000-to-settle-lawsuit-mostly-to-the-lawyers.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20101012/10365311390/spying-school-district-pays-out-610-000-to-settle-lawsuit-mostly-to-the-lawyers.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ We've been following the case in suburban Philadelphia of the Lower Merion School District, which was sued by a student for <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100218/1056378228.shtml">spying</a> on the student in his home with district issued laptops (the kid was disciplined for supposedly using drugs, with the evidence being a photo of him in his room at his laptop -- the kid claims he was just <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100221/2118128243.shtml">eating Mike &#038; Ikes candy</a>).  While the district initially denied it was spying on students, later reports found <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100504/1656459301.shtml">58,000 images were taken</a>, including 469 of another student who <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100729/03442110409.shtml">also sued</a>.
<br /><br />
While the feds <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100817/17500610660.shtml">declined</a> to bring criminal charges, it looks like the school district has now <a href="http://www.networkworld.com/community/node/67320" target="_blank">settled the outstanding lawsuits</a> mainly by giving the lawyers a big chunk of money.  In total, the school district paid out $610,000, with $425,000 going to the lawyers.  The student who brought the first case will get $175,000, and the student in the second case will get $10,000 (the article mistakenly suggests two separate payments of $185,000, but I believe that's wrong).  The district, in its <a href="http://www.lmsd.org/sections/news/default.php?m=0&#038;t=today&#038;p=lmsd_anno&#038;id=1458" target="_blank">announcement</a> admits that, in total, this whole thing is costing about $1.2 million, which is actually being covered by insurance.
<br /><br />
The situation is a bit tricky, because, in some sense, taxpayers are footing the bill for the district's ridiculous policy choices (even though insurance is covering the direct cost).  I would imagine that this sort of thing will act as a reasonable deterrent to other school districts considering (or already using) similar technology.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20101012/10365311390/spying-school-district-pays-out-610-000-to-settle-lawsuit-mostly-to-the-lawyers.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20101012/10365311390/spying-school-district-pays-out-610-000-to-settle-lawsuit-mostly-to-the-lawyers.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20101012/10365311390/spying-school-district-pays-out-610-000-to-settle-lawsuit-mostly-to-the-lawyers.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>legal-fees</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20101012/10365311390</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Fri, 17 Sep 2010 12:00:10 PDT</pubDate>
<title>School Agrees To Pay Student $33,000 After Teacher Dug Through Her Phone To Find Private Nude Photos</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100916/14185311042.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100916/14185311042.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ The ACLU has announced that a school district in Pennsylvania has settled the case it brought against the district for <a href="http://www.aclupa.org/pressroom/aclusettlesstudentcellphon.htm" target="_blank">suspending a student after discovering nude photos on her mobile phone</a>.  Apparently, the phone was confiscated after the student used the phone during her homeroom period -- a violation of school policy.  That part was fine.  Where it became a problem is that the teacher then went through her phone and found some "explicit" photos, described as nude photographs of the girl, which she only had intended to show her boyfriend.  The student was then suspended -- and there were <a href="http://techdirt.com/articles/20090117/0557263447.shtml">threats from prosecutors</a> of charging her with child pornography.  The student and the ACLU argued that the school and the teacher had no right to explore the contents of the phone that it had confiscated -- and the school has now agreed to pay $33,000 to settle the lawsuit.  As the ACLU notes, this is an area of some confusion, but schools should remember that students do have privacy rights:
<blockquote><i>
The ACLU-PA hoped to use this case to help alert school officials across Pennsylvania to students' privacy rights in their cell phones.  Very little case law exists discussing student-cell-phone searches.  While the settlement forecloses a court ruling, the case has led the ACLU-PA to contact the Pennsylvania School Boards Association (PSBA), which this week agreed to work with the ACLU towards crafting guidelines for teachers and school officials to help them better handle situations involving student cell phones and other electronic devices without unlawfully invading student privacy. Walczak noted that the goal was to prevent future violations of students' constitutional rights.
</i></blockquote>
However, the overall case is not over, as the ACLU is still pushing forward in a lawsuit <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100115/1500557776.shtml">against the prosecutor</a>, who is still claiming that the activity of this, and a few other girls, counted as child pornography.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100916/14185311042.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100916/14185311042.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100916/14185311042.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>privacy</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20100916/14185311042</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Fri, 13 Aug 2010 17:26:49 PDT</pubDate>
<title>Teacher Loses Defamation Lawsuit Against Student Journalist</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100811/17332810596.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100811/17332810596.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ One of the points of a student newspaper is to teach kids about journalism, and it looks like one student at Churchill High School in Nevada got quite the lesson when the school's music teacher <a href="http://www.mynews4.com/story.php?id=25100&#038;n=122" target="_blank">sued the student for defamation</a>, after an article that was critical of the music teacher was published.  Thankfully, a judge has dismissed the lawsuit, noting that "nothing written by the student was false, defamatory or negligent."  Many people seem to feel that anything they don't like that's published about them must be defamation, but that's not how it works.  Even so, it seems pretty extreme for a teacher to go so far as to file a lawsuit against a student journalist.  Nice to see that this lawsuit went nowhere fast.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100811/17332810596.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100811/17332810596.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100811/17332810596.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>quite-the-lesson</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20100811/17332810596</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Mon, 19 Jul 2010 10:43:50 PDT</pubDate>
<title>Removing iPods And Mobile Phones From Students Is 'Discipline Theater'</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/blog/wireless/articles/20100718/23410310261.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/blog/wireless/articles/20100718/23410310261.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ I remember a few decades back, when I was in high school, our principal announced that her biggest concern and top focus was stopping kids from bringing walkmen cassette players to school.  This was in a school where there were all of the more typical high school issues, including drugs, weapons and violence.  The whole thing seemed so ridiculous.  But, apparently, little has changed.  We've seen lots of stories over the years, of course, about bans on mobile phones and iPods and the like.  But, apparently, banning mobile phones and iPods from schools <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-10635333" target="_blank">is becoming government policy in the UK</a>.  At that link, Bill Thompson notes the incongruity between things like mobile phones and iPods compared to other things that are banned (such as weapons and fireworks).  But, of course, the reasoning is different.  The thinking on phones and MP3 players is to keep kids from getting distracted, and to help teachers keep the attention of kids.  In theory.
<br /><br />
In a rather apt analogy, Thompson calls the whole thing "discipline theater," akin to "security theater" found at airports:
<blockquote><i>
It will do nothing to improve behaviour in schools where teachers are not respected by their students.
<br /><br />
However, it could have a negative impact in other ways, as it enforces the idea that schools are places where "technology" is something out there, a word processor or spreadsheet on a desktop PC to be used for a particular purpose, instead of something that permeates all aspects of our daily lives and is becoming increasingly important. 
</i></blockquote>
He also points out that many schools are currently using such mobile devices in innovative ways within the classroom, and setting up a process to keep them out seems backwards.  It's too bad that the first reaction of so many people is just to ban such technology rather than (a) looking at ways to use it in a helpful manner or (b) understanding why the technology sometimes acts as a distraction.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/blog/wireless/articles/20100718/23410310261.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/blog/wireless/articles/20100718/23410310261.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/blog/wireless/articles/20100718/23410310261.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>won't-actually-help</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20100718/23410310261</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Wed, 30 Jun 2010 07:16:05 PDT</pubDate>
<title>Should Schools Be Involved In Disciplining Students For Off-Campus Bullying?</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100629/03111510001.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100629/03111510001.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ The NY Times is running a long article looking at one of the favorite moral panics of the day: cyberbullying.  The specific article <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/28/style/28bully.html?src=twt&#038;twt=nytimestech&#038;pagewanted=all" target="_blank">questions how schools should be dealing with the issue</a>, especially when it comes to activity that takes place entirely off-campus.    The article actually focuses a lot of attention on the middle school principal we wrote about a couple months ago who sent a long email to parents telling them to <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100429/1100509240.shtml">ban all social networking</a> from their kids -- effectively taking the "head in sand" approach to dealing with these issues.  To be fair, in this article, that principal comes off as a lot more reasonable, initially telling angry parents that off-campus activity really is outside of the domain of what the school should be involved in.
<br /><br />
In reading through the article, though, part of what struck me is that it seems like some parents are simply trying to get the school to act because they're unwilling to act themselves.  Take, for example, this exchange towards the beginning of the article:
<blockquote><i>
Punish him, insisted the parents.
<br /><br />
"I said, 'This occurred out of school, on a weekend,' " recalled the principal, Tony Orsini. "We can't discipline him."
<br /><br />
Had they contacted the boy's family, he asked.
<br /><br />
Too awkward, they replied. The fathers coach sports together.
<br /><br />
What about the police, Mr. Orsini asked.
<br /><br />
A criminal investigation would be protracted, the parents had decided, its outcome uncertain. They wanted immediate action.  
</i></blockquote>
In other words, there were plenty of paths that the family could have taken, but they didn't want to actually do anything.  They wanted the school to act as parents for the kid because they were unwilling to do so.  That's not to say these things don't create difficult situations, but it seems like a weak solution when parents just punt the issue and demand that schools handle it.  And, of course, the article also highlights cases where parents also get (reasonably) upset when schools punish their kids for off-campus activity.
<br /><br />
It's no secret that kids can and will be mean.  And with modern communication technology it's easier for kids to be mean directly more often and in much more public ways.  That's a challenge, to be sure, but asking schools to handle those issues doesn't seem like an effective or an efficient solution.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100629/03111510001.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100629/03111510001.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100629/03111510001.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>cyber-or-otherwise</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20100629/03111510001</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Mon, 24 May 2010 13:40:00 PDT</pubDate>
<title>Student Sues School For Privacy Invasion After School Found Nude Photos On Her Phone</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100521/1051269527.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100521/1051269527.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ You may recall the news story from last year about some teenaged girls in Pennsylvania who were being <a href="http://techdirt.com/articles/20090117/0557263447.shtml">threatened with child porn charges</a>, after taking "nude and semi-nude" photos of themselves on a mobile phone during a party, and sending them to others.  The judge <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090331/0736084324.shtml">halted</a> the potential lawsuit, noting that the nude photos didn't appear to depict any sexual acts (as per the law), but the local prosecutor <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100115/1500557776.shtml">still wanted</a> to file charges.  As more and more details came out, the whole thing got increasingly ridiculous.  Apparently, the girls in question were given a choice to either take a "re-education" class, or face charges.
<br /><br />
And now, reader <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/profile.php?u=picklemonger">Pickle Monger</a> points out that one of the girls, along with the ACLU, is <a href="http://www.cnn.com/2010/CRIME/05/21/pennsylvania.racy.photos/index.html" target="_blank">suing the school district itself</a>, claiming that it violated the girl's privacy.  Apparently, the way the school found out about the photos was that it had confiscated her mobile phone, after she was caught making a phone call on school grounds, against school rules.  There's no problem with confiscating the phone, of course, but then the school searched through the phone and found those photos.  It's the search that the ACLU and the student are questioning.  The school had no reason to search through the phone, or to look at the photos stored on the phone after it had confiscated it.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100521/1051269527.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100521/1051269527.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100521/1051269527.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>the-case-that-keeps-on-giving</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20100521/1051269527</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Mon, 19 Apr 2010 13:21:00 PDT</pubDate>
<title>Laptop Spy Scandal Administrator Just &quot;Loved&quot; Violating Students' Fourth Amendment Rights</title>
<dc:creator>Karl Bode</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100416/1123249038.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100416/1123249038.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ <p>Earlier this year a school outside of Philadelphia was busted giving students laptops that included hidden software that covertly allowed school officials to <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100218/1056378228.shtml">turn on the cameras and monitor the students</a> -- no matter where they were. The not-so-brilliant scheme came to light when one child was disciplined for behavior that was only captured thanks to these laptops. Not surprisingly, a fairly huge scandal was born, followed by a lawsuit against the school district. The school district has long claimed that the surveillance system was only used to locate missing laptops.  But a new <a href="http://media.philly.com/documents/MotiontoCompel.pdf">motion</a> (pdf) filed as part of the lawsuit now claims that not only were thousands of photos taken, many were taken of students who never reported their laptops missing. Meanwhile, the lawyer claims to have e-mails from the plan administrator (who has been pleading the fifth) highlighting how <a href="http://www.philly.com/philly/news/homepage/20100416_1_000s_of_Web_cam_images__suit_says.html">she was really having a great time</a> watching student &quot;soap operas&quot; unfold:</p><blockquote>&quot;<em>Back at district offices, the Robbins motion says, employees with access to the images marveled at the tracking software. It was like a window into &quot;a little LMSD soap opera,&quot; a staffer is quoted as saying in an e-mail to Carol Cafiero, the administrator running the program. &quot;I know, I love it,&quot; she is quoted as having replied</em>.&quot;</blockquote>   <p>One family involved in the suit provided evidence that their 15-year-old son was photographed more than 400 times over the course of two weeks last fall (his laptop was neither missing or stolen), but their lawyer provided just one surprisingly well lit and framed (for a laptop) photo taken of their son sleeping. The school district has subsequently issued a <a href="http://www.philly.com/philly/news/Lower_Merion_District_Statement_041610.html">statement</a> admitting the system took photos, but denying that they engaged in any deliberate wrong doing or that the photos were used for any &quot;inappropriate purposes.&quot; Senator Arlen Specter, engaged in a heated battle for re-election, used the story as a springboard to call for tougher federal wiretap laws. Specter went so far as to <a href="http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5gdwlE3DpcMD9gNAnFMrQ7iNHCS6AD9EOI0007">hold a hearing near the school</a>, where one parent insisted that warnings would be enough:</p><blockquote>&quot;<em>Bob Wegbreit said a warning might suffice to let families know the district might activate webcams without a student's knowledge. Students could then choose to keep the computers in other parts of the house, instead of their bedrooms, said Wegbreit, whose group fears the lawsuit will damage the upscale district's finances and reputation</em>.&quot;</blockquote>It might be a little too late for that, Bob (besides, &quot;warnings&quot; don't trump that whole Fourth Amendment thing). Even if you could <a href="http://techliberation.com/2010/02/25/laptop-spying-and-the-fourth-amendment/">somehow argue</a> the project didn't violate the Fourth Amendment, it remains mind boggling that anybody, at any level in the district, would think that off-site covert photography of students was a bright idea for <strong>any</strong> reason. As more and more schools offer kids laptops and netbooks, this case acts as a reminder to parents and students to ask questions as these kinds of programs are developed elsewhere. It's also a warning shot to administrators who think protecting their property (or personal amusement) trumps a student's right to privacy at home. You do start to wonder where people could <strong>possibly</strong> be getting the idea that surveillance with no recourse to law or common sense is a good idea.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100416/1123249038.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100416/1123249038.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100416/1123249038.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>surveillance-state-soap-opera</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20100416/1123249038</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Mon, 22 Feb 2010 17:40:00 PST</pubDate>
<title>More Details Emerging About School Laptop Spying, And It Doesn't Look Good</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100222/1118438253.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100222/1118438253.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ Following up on this morning's post, new details are emerging about the <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100218/1056378228.shtml">school spying scandal</a> in which a student was punished for apparently <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100221/2118128243.shtml">chowing down</a> on Mike&#038;Ike candy (which the school thought were drugs). In our comments, someone named Paul <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/article.php?sid=20100221/2118128243#c110">points</a> us to a blog post from a security consultant, who <a href="http://strydehax.blogspot.com/2010/02/spy-at-harrington-high.html" target="_blank">digs much deeper into the story</a> -- focusing on one of the techies who worked at the school and apparently had a noticeable internet presence, having said a few things that could come back to haunt him.  Note, that the school itself has said that only two techies on staff had the power to initiate the use of the remote spying tool.
<br /><br />
Apparently, in various forums, blog posts and videos, one of the school's techies talked about the technology they were using and how to set it up so that the user would not realize they were being spied on.  He also discussed how to prevent a laptop using this software from being "jailbroken," so users couldn't discover that their computers were being used in this manner.  Other forum posts from students at the school show that they were told they could not use other computers, could not disable the cameras and could not jailbreak their laptops on the risk of expulsion.
<br /><br />
Furthermore, in looking at the software that was being used, the security consultant found serious security problems with it, in some ways similar to the famed Sony BMG rootkit:
<blockquote><i>
With some of my colleagues, I began a reverse engineering effort against LANRev in order to determine the nature of the threat and possible countermeasures. Some of the things we found at first left us aghast as security pros: the spyware "client" (they call it an agent) binds to the server permanently without using authentication or key distribution. Find an unbound agent on your network with Bonjour, click on it, you own it. The server software, with an externally facing Internet port... runs as root. I'm not kidding. For those unfamiliar with the principle of least privilege- this is an indicator of a highly unskilled design. Unfortunately, when we got down to basic forensics, LANRev appears to cover its tracks well.
</i></blockquote>
Things keep looking worse for the school, and school officials have done little to actually explain what happened, if the prevailing story is not actually the case.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100222/1118438253.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100222/1118438253.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100222/1118438253.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>a-bit-proud-of-your-spying...</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20100222/1118438253</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Mon, 22 Feb 2010 09:06:00 PST</pubDate>
<title>School Spying Scandal Gets Even More Bizarre: Student In Question Was Disciplined For Eating Candy</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100221/2118128243.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100221/2118128243.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ The story of the school district that supposedly <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100218/1056378228.shtml">spied on some students</a> keeps getting odder and odder.  While the school district claims that it used the secret remote webcam activation technology <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100219/1418438242.shtml">42 times</a> -- and only to track down stolen or lost laptops -- it still hasn't explained why this particular student was punished.  He claims his laptop was not stolen and there was no reason to turn it on.  The school claims that the assistant principal who supposedly confronted the student with an image from the webcam is being unfairly tarnished.
<br><br>
But here's where it gets even odder.  Apparently, the "improper act" that the student was disciplined for was an accusation of either drug use or drug selling.  For what?  Well, the <a href="http://reason.com/blog/2010/02/20/lower-pervian-school-district" target="_blank">image showed the student with Mike & Ikes candies</a>, which do have a passing resemblance to pills, but (last we checked) do not appear to be controlled substances.
<br><br>
Now, there certainly could be more to this story, but the school has not done a particularly good job explaining its side of things.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100221/2118128243.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100221/2118128243.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100221/2118128243.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>mike-&amp;-ikes</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20100221/2118128243</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Fri, 19 Feb 2010 15:33:00 PST</pubDate>
<title>School District Says It Only Turned Spy Cameras On 42 Times; FBI Now Investigating</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100219/1418438242.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100219/1418438242.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ More details are coming out about the case we wrote about yesterday concerning the <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100218/1056378228.shtml">school district that could (and did) turn on webcams</a> on student laptops.  The district is now claiming that, yes, it had the ability to do so, and <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/02/19/AR2010021902004_pf.html" target="_blank">in fact did so 42 times</a> (though, it never told students or parents it could do this).  However, the district claims that it <i>only</i> did so to try to track down lost or stolen laptops.  That doesn't explain how this resulted in a student being reprimanded for "improper behavior in his home" though.
<br /><br />
Either way, it looks like this is going beyond a civil case of the families suing the school district.  The FBI is now investigating the case as well, to see if the district violated either wiretapping or computer-intrusion laws.  Now, it's not unheard of to have capabilities like this turned on to find lost or stolen laptops -- so perhaps that is understandable.  But the fact that this kid was reprimanded for stuff he did in the privacy of his home while caught on camera definitely seems questionable.  No one seems willing to say if this particular laptop was ever reported "lost or stolen," so perhaps the district's argument is that the student had taken the laptop.  But if that's the case, you would think they would have come out and said so, rather than the vaguely worded denials put forth already.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100219/1418438242.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100219/1418438242.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100219/1418438242.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>you're-on-school-district-candid-camera</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20100219/1418438242</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Thu, 18 Feb 2010 11:13:10 PST</pubDate>
<title>School Accused Of Spying On Kids In Their Homes With Spyware That Secretly Activated Webcams</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100218/1056378228.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100218/1056378228.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ A whole bunch of you are sending in this absolutely horrifying story of a school district outside of Philadelphia that apparently gave its students laptops that <a href="http://www.boingboing.net/2010/02/17/school-used-student.html" target="_blank">included hidden software that allowed district officials to secretly turn on the laptops' webcams</a> and monitor student activities, no matter where they were.  This all came to light when a student was disciplined for "improper behavior in his home" with the evidence being a photo of the kid from his laptop webcam.  The district is now being sued for this.  It's rather stunning that anyone thought this was a good idea.  Secretly spying on children in their homes when they have a very real expectation of privacy is downright horrifying.  It's not hard to see how this could be abused in very dangerous ways.
<br><Br>
<b>Update</b>: Yikes.  This may be more common than I thought.  <a href="http://twitter.com/normative/statuses/9295840723f" target="_blank">Julian Sanchez</a> points us to a <a href="http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/digitalnation/learning/schools/how-google-saved-a-school.html" target="_blank">recent PBS Frontline episode</a> about technology in schools that shows a school official proudly showing off the ability to spy on kids this way (well, using remote desktop emulation, rather than turning on webcams, but many of the kids seem to use webcams a lot).  That part of the video starts at 4:37 and even shows him taking a photo of a girl as she does her hair via the camera:
<center>
<script type="text/javascript" src="http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/js/pap/embed.js?frol02s28adq996"></script>
</center>
The school administrator seems to think it's funny to spy on kids this way.  Wow.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100218/1056378228.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100218/1056378228.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100218/1056378228.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>horrifying</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20100218/1056378228</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Mon, 15 Feb 2010 20:05:29 PST</pubDate>
<title>WiFi On The School Bus</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100215/0216338163.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100215/0216338163.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ WiFi has been showing up on airplanes and trains lately, and in Silicon Valley, it's used on the special shuttle buses that companies like Google and Yahoo use to get employees to work.  But what about for high schoolers?  The NY Times recently had an article about a high school out in the far reaches of Arizona that <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/12/education/12bus.html?src=twt&#038;twt=nytimestech" target="_blank">has put WiFi on a school bus</a>, and found that the impact is really quite amazing:
<blockquote><i>
 Wi-Fi access has transformed what was often a boisterous bus ride into a rolling study hall, and behavioral problems have virtually disappeared.
<br /><br />
"It's made a big difference," said J. J. Johnson, the bus's driver. "Boys aren't hitting each other, girls are busy, and there's not so much jumping around."
</i></blockquote>
What's amusing here is the juxtaposition of this article with recent articles that fret about kids spending <i>too much</i> time online, with worries that they're becoming addicted or wasting time that could be better spent.  But, here the article is suggesting exactly the opposite: that not only is more internet access leading to a less rowdy bus ride, but it's helping the students become better students.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100215/0216338163.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100215/0216338163.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100215/0216338163.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>the-wifi-on-the-bus-goes...-data-data-data?</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20100215/0216338163</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
</channel>
</rss>