Student suspended over Facebook gets reprieve

An Oak Forest High School student suspended for making critical comments about a teacher on his Facebook page may get his disciplinary record cleared.

[Colloquy]

March 4, 2010
BY MICHAEL DRAKULICH

An Oak Forest High School student suspended for making critical comments about a teacher on his Facebook page may get his disciplinary record cleared.

That is if he stays out of trouble for the rest of the school year.

Justin Bird, a sophomore at the school, was suspended for five days on Feb. 15 for the comments he made on the social networking Web site about his math teacher.

He was suspended for five days, with the possibility of having three of the five removed from his record if he completed an anger management class.

However, after meeting with administrators this week, Bird's mother Donna said the two sides reached an agreement that would wipe her son's record clean.

District Supt. Bill Kendall said it's not a done deal. He said administrators would discuss the possibility of clearing Justin's record at the end of the year.

[Free Speech 4 All]

That's bs to me, whatever the kid put on his personal facebook account shouldn't matter and the school has absolutely NO RIGHT to run the kids life outside of school! It's the parents resposibility to monitor what their child does while on the internet at home NOT the schools!

[midlo guy]

I agree the school shouldn't have anything to do with it but the kid also shouldn't be writing stuff on facebook about a teacher. I mean we all at sometime have blownoff steam about a boss or work or something but we never have named someone in a particular case. That would be like calling my main boss by name and the place where I work on facebook and posting it. That is just stupid. Yes youth and inexperience is not a crime but you still must take responsibility for ykour actions which is not seen to much these days. After all you can kill your parents and claim abuse and it suppose to make it ok(i.e the Menendez bros). I not saying the suspension was right but something should have been done to him.

[5yr Midlo Resident]

The teacher had it coming as far as I'm concerned.

From the original 2/20 article.

"Bird said her son and the teacher had been clashing since the beginning of the school year. Even during parent-teacher conferences in November, she said, the teacher admitted to trying to "get a rise" out of Justin on several occasions but would stop. However, it began again, she said, and during one encounter the teacher called Justin "stupid" in front of his classmates."

I'm not saying I'd be dumb enough to post it publicly, but the teacher has no business teaching if he's going to call students stupid let alone call them stupid in front of their class or admit in conferences that he tries to get a rise out of his students.

I'd say the ahole deserved it.

[Free Speech 4 All]

Yes calling the teacher out by name wasn't the smartest move but also the teacher shouldn't be calling the student out in front of everybody and then admitting to the parents ths he was "trying to get a rise" out of the kid,ok fine admonish the child for being young and foolish but in the same token fire that teacher who seems to be on a power trip basically telling the kid "Look what I can do and you can't" If it were my child I would do everything I can to have the teacher fiered and assure that he/she NEVER teaches ever again!
Two wrongs don't make a right but the teacher should lead by example, and the school overstepped it's authority.

[30 years in midlo]

What does "trying to get a rise" mean? If the teacher intended it to mean trying to get the boy to open up more in class it may be looked at differently. If it was antagonizing the boy why didn't the parent/parents get involved when this was first learned?
Called him stupid or said that was a stupid thing to do? Again things could be taken out of context.

I have computers in my house and my children are not allowed to use them unsupervised. I don't watch them every minute but I watch close enough to know what they are doing. I also have a facebook account so I can monitor what they post.

Disrespecting authority should never be acceptable for children. The parent/parents should explain what disciplinary actions they are putting in place and the school should agree to their handling it. But it should be necessary for something to happen.

[Skeptic]

From my point of view, a school has the authority to suspend students for infractions that would be the defined policy of the school. If publishing derogatory remarks, deserved or not, about a teacher is grounds for suspension, then what defense does the student have? Especially, if the student were made aware of the policies at the start of the school year?

Facebook is not the proper forum to address a disagreement with a teacher. If the student has an issue with a teacher, that should be dealt with thru proper procedures. There are two sides to every story, and it sounds as though this should go thru a hearing, to examine both sides of the story.

For a student to start publishing adverse stories about a teacher starts to sound like libel, and the defense to libel is you're telling the truth. The truth here may be murky, so, really the student is sticking his neck out.

Free Speech 4 All wrote:

Yes calling the teacher out by name wasn't the smartest move but also the teacher shouldn't be calling the student out in front of everybody and then admitting to the parents ths he was "trying to get a rise" out of the kid,ok fine admonish the child for being young and foolish but in the same token fire that teacher who seems to be on a power trip basically telling the kid "Look what I can do and you can't" If it were my child I would do everything I can to have the teacher fiered and assure that he/she NEVER teaches ever again!
Two wrongs don't make a right but the teacher should lead by example, and the school overstepped it's authority.

[Skeptic]

Facebook accounts mostly are private, and can be seen by whoever the student allows, depending upon how his privacy settings are configured.

So, the question becomes, if he libels the teacher, is it libel because only his friends can see it? Or is it libel only when available to the general public? If his statements, published on his Facebook account are untrue, even in part, he has libeled the teacher.

If he has committed libel, the teacher has a right to collect damages, to right his good name and reputation. The teacher would have a cause of action.

Same thing here on topix, in some forums, I see people naming names, and attributing lots of unsavory activities to them. There have already been a few suits because of this. People don't understand that is not appropriate.

Free Speech 4 All wrote:

That's bs to me, whatever the kid put on his personal facebook account shouldn't matter and the school has absolutely NO RIGHT to run the kids life outside of school! It's the parents resposibility to monitor what their child does while on the internet at home NOT the schools!

[Colloquy]

Skeptic wrote:

Facebook accounts mostly are private, and can be seen by whoever the student allows, depending upon how his privacy settings are configured.
So, the question becomes, if he libels the teacher, is it libel because only his friends can see it? Or is it libel only when available to the general public? If his statements, published on his Facebook account are untrue, even in part, he has libeled the teacher.
If he has committed libel, the teacher has a right to collect damages, to right his good name and reputation. The teacher would have a cause of action.
Same thing here on topix, in some forums, I see people naming names, and attributing lots of unsavory activities to them. There have already been a few suits because of this. People don't understand that is not appropriate.
<quoted text>

I believe that in order to sue for libel (with the intent of collecting damages) you would actually have to suffer a loss of income to do that.

[OF Watch]

Personal Facebook accounts are private, but if you re-read the article, the kid set up a fan page specifically for the reason of bashing the teacher.

Fan pages are completely different in their privacy settings in that, once the kid makes it an active page, it can be viewed by anyone. There are rules about fan pages regarding association, ownership, etc., but they are loosely enforced.

[Free Speech 4 All]

Colloquy wrote:

<quoted text>I believe that in order to sue for libel (with the intent of collecting damages) you would actually have to suffer a loss of income to do that.

You are 100% correct on this one, for a person to be able to sue for libel,slander,defimation and such there has to be a number of things, loss of income is one the other is it has to affect the plaintif in such a way as to affect their life style; in other words the teacher in this case would be affectted by losing their job and teaching cerdentials, alsao it would have to be on more than facebook, basically bill boards, news paper ads/articals you get the idea

[Indy Coin]

Kind of like what is going to happen to the Crestwood water ordeal

[BS Goes to Prison]

The only thing thats going to happen in the Crestwood water ordeal is the mayor and his father going to prison.

[YOU AN IDIOT]

BS Goes to Prison wrote:

The only thing thats going to happen in the Crestwood water ordeal is the mayor and his father going to prison.

It will never happen. Your sorry life allows you to think like that. They beat you and you hate that.

[BS Goes to Prison]

They havent beaten me. Someone I love died of cancer though and Id like to see the people who give innocent people cancer water be judged for it. Youre entitled to your opinion as I am entitled to mine

[5yr Midlo Resident]

30 years, by the connotation of the article, "getting a rise" is not intended as a positive remark. It sounds more like goading that kid. Possibly with derogatory remarks. Possibly with brow-beating. It says right in my quote that he promised to stop. If it was something good he was doing he'd have had no reason to promise the parents he'd stop.

[30 years in midlo]

Does anybody know if there have been any reprocussions to the teacher? It seems to me that if these things are true the teacher would have been or should be disciplined and with a whole classroom of students it should be easy enough to verify. I just worry about terminology being a problem. If the teacher is guilty something should be done. But like anyone else the teacher should be innocent until proven guilty. Once proven guilty hang him high, these are kids he's working with.

[JimRossi]

30 years in midlo wrote:

Does anybody know if there have been any reprocussions to the teacher? It seems to me that if these things are true the teacher would have been or should be disciplined and with a whole classroom of students it should be easy enough to verify. I just worry about terminology being a problem. If the teacher is guilty something should be done. But like anyone else the teacher should be innocent until proven guilty. Once proven guilty hang him high, these are kids he's working with.

This is a very interesting comment by "30 years ...."
All the focus has been on what the student allegedly did wrong.
I still am completely clueless on what "these things" were or if they're true.
With a room full of students, it should indeed be easy to verify.
I still haven't heard what the student posted.
But based on all the postings, the teacher may have exhibited inappropriate behavior.
Students are expected to behave, but teachers are usually held to a higher standard.
If there was an investigation into what a student did at home, on his own time, on his own computer,
why was there not an investigation by the school board of why the teacher may have caused the student to do this, on school time?
Maybe it would have been best for a court to evaluate, with a jury to decide?
I will always be a supporter of free speech.

Jim Rossi
[e-mail]