Nowadays, we have many social networks that help us to keep in contact with people such as hi5 and facebook. Especially facebook, I think many of you are on it, right? When I saw the title "India Student suspended for rude Facebook messages" on the BBC News website, it caught my eye because I use facebook, so I want to check out what happens in this story?
In the article, Asit Jolly reports that in India almost 12 million people use Facebook, and it is most popular with young urban Indians. One famous school in Chandigarh, Vivek High School, suspended 16 students for 3 months because they posted "rude and abusive" things about their math teacher on their facebooks. The students posted rude words because they were angry with teacher which give them low grades. Parents agreed that is not right to disrespect their teacher, but they thought 3 months are too long for suspension during the final year. In addition, the students think this is way too much to control their life; it not private and free to express themselves. However, school management will consider the punishment again on October 18, 2010.
Do you think what the students did is wrong? Do you think what school management did is right?
I think in this situation, the students should accept what grades they got, or if they think that the grade they got is not right they should talk to their teacher. Even though they keep posting rude things their grade will never change. On the other hand, I think the school management should not have infringed their private and free expression. If I am the principal of this school I will not suspended them but I will talk to them with the reasons and tell them "anything that you think is not right or unclear, you should talk or ask your teacher". Moreover, I agree that the students should respect to their teacher, but the teacher should respect or listen to students too, if he/she is wrong.
This article reminds me of forwarded email that I got while the red shirt protest was happening in central Bangkok. It was about a student who posted some very negative thing implied to the monarchy. I'm not sure that was a true message or someone who wanted to make a worse situation in Thailand. Did anybody get that forward email?
In short, I think the cyber- world has two side; good and bad - it depends on how people use it. Parents should pay attention to their child to use internet in proper ways.
References
I agree with you that everything always has 2 sides. Poor or high quality depends upon user.
ReplyDeleteI think your article attracting every one in our class and attracting me most. I am one of facebook user but actually I don’t want much to circulate on cyber-world because sometimes I love to live in natural world, connect with people in normal one-way. For facebook ,it also has 2 sides in good effect and bad effect. Zizek in New Scientist said, "I hate Facebook. If you use it more than an hour a day you should be mobilised to clean streets for useful work." For her point, I agree with her but sometimes I can not do it:)
For your questions, Do you think what the students did is wrong? Do you think what school management did is right? I can say Yes and NO.
After answering your questions, I take a look carefully. This article sound strange to me, and I smell something wrong. I agree with your opinion is the best way that teacher and students can do. I have extra vision, the first is 16students it’s too much shown not a basic problem. The problems may be from teaching system or quality of teacher. Secondly, 3 months suspension is not appropriate since it’s caused 16 students turning to be more stupid and start to hate mathematic. The teacher should be ashamed and find the best way to solve this problem. Thirdly, rude and abusive of students are shown the custom problems. The school and parents should take care on their children. To solve this problem, let look around into every possible factors and correct it. Please carefully concern that everything always has 2 sides.
There was also an excellent article on free speech issues, and why the US is morally much better than almost every other society on this issue, in the BBC News a couple of days ago. In "Hateful protests try American commitment to free speech", Andrew Cohen, a legal analyst, examines the background of a free speech case that has just reached the United States Supreme Court (2010). As he notes, the US would never censor or ban something simply because it is extremely offensive to a lot of people. (I'm not American, but I am a fan of the US Constitution and the US Supreme Court that protects it for and from the American government and people.)
ReplyDeleteReferences
Cohen, A. (2010, October 8). Hateful protests try American commitment to free speech. BBC News. Retrieved October 10, 2010 from http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-11497828
I didn't actually address Apple's questions or response in my last comment, so I'll do that now. I've also had a bit more time to think about it.
ReplyDeleteFirst, I think the students were extremely reckless, even stupid, to post such things on the internet because once posted, you no longer have control over who might see it, which is why I never post my phone number online; I assume that anything I post might be read by anyone in the world, and if I don't want that, I don't post it.
I think the students were wrong to put personal attacks on their teachers online because the teachers are private individuals, not public figures. It's OK to call the president of the United States an idiot or whatever you like because he's a public figure and has to accept public judgements for and against himself. The human right to free speech means you can say what you think, even if it's offensive, against public figures and institutions, but it should not allow personal attacks against private individuals. Had the students written something more general, for example that teachers who gave low marks were ignorant, biased pigs, I wouldn't like it, but I think that the right to say such things should be protected; however, that is not what the students in this case did, so I think they were wrong.
And since the students did something wrong, it was reasonable for their school to punish them, although I'm not sure if a three month suspension was the right punishment. However, I haven't read what they actually wrote, so perhaps it was appropriate.
I agree with Apple that a more responsible and mature approach would have been to take their problem to the teacher and perhaps the school principal. As Namkhang also notes, students do often have disagreements or problems with teachers or a whole teaching system, and the school should encourage students to raise their concerns so that a solution can be sought. Namkhang also reminds us that it's often important to get more facts before we decide who might be right or wrong and why.
Actually, this same story in the BBC News had already caught my eye, along with the one about Snyder v. Phelps that is now before the US Supreme Court which I've already cited in my previous comment. Had Apple not written up her response, I might have done it myself. I'm glad that Apple beat me to it.