Parents are increasingly concerned that public school administrators
are superseding the legal authority parents have in their child’s life. Missouri
parents were surprised to learn that their directives for their children
not to use computers at school or no parental permission allowing student
computer use were ignored by some school districts. Approval for children to
use computers was granted by superintendents or other administrators over directives of parents via policy
adopted by the school district. This policy was written by a private
NGO, the Missouri School Board Association:
Jill Carter of Granby MO testified
about a Technology
Usage Agreement given to
her son for her signature. A casual read of the document seemed to indicate
that a parent had to give permission for a child to use technology (computer,
email, internet etc.) in the classroom.
“No student will be given access
to the district’s technology resources until the district receives User
Agreements signed by the student and the student’s parent/guardian. Students
who are 18 or who are otherwise able to enter into an enforceable contract
may sign the User Agreement without additional signatures”
However, upon discovering
that her son was in fact using the school’s computers even though she had
refused to sign the TUA, she investigated the whole Usage agreement which
also stated:
“Students who do not have a User
Agreement on file with the district may
be granted permission to use the district’s technology resources by the
superintendent or designee“
So basically, parents have no
ability to control their child’s access to technology or the internet in
classroom. The school’s designee can always trump the parent’s wishes. This
is bad enough. Then she read the language at the bottom of the policy:
“A user
does not have a legal expectation of privacy in the user’s electronic communications
or other activities involving the district’s technology resources including,
but not limited to, voice mail, telecommunications, e-mail and access to
the intranet, Internet or network drives. By using the district’s network
and technology resources, all users consent to having their electronic communications
and all other use monitored by the district.”
A school board member from another district also testified
that she discovered this same language in her own district’s technology
usage policy. No surprise. The language has been copyrighted to the Missouri
School Board Association and is widely used by districts all over the
state. Check your district’s policy. It’s probably the same.
School administrators are becoming the authority in
determining whether or not your child is marked as an ‘excused’ or ‘unexcused’
absence in data sets. Attendance policies have been tightened up by
the districts due to waiver conditions Arne Duncan has granted for NCLB relief and to meet the
‘college and career ready’ goals via MSIP5. Remember this notice from
Francis Howell and unexcused absences?
Watch for the subtle language change about unexcused
absences moving into the realm of unlawful absences in Pennsylvania.
This was supplied by a parent of a kindergartner:
So even if your student does not attend school (regardless
of academic standing or parental decision), if the state determines it
is unexcused, it is now unlawful. If your child racks up too many
of these state decided unlawful/unexcused absences, get ready to appear in Family
Court. From the parent:
This is less about the teaching and more about controlling
policies.
While that particular language (unexcused vs unlawful)
has not been provided to us by a Missouri parent, we do know that a parent was summoned to appear in Family
Court to answer why her terminally ill
child was missing too much school.
The Missouri Constitution directs the state provide a ‘free and gratuitous’ education.
The provision of education delivery with punitive measures isn’t really ‘free and gratuitous’. Public education has become a maze of increasing
mandates which actually take away the rights and liberties of parents:
The policy giving the State authority over parental decisions
for their children is a totalitarian educational structure, not a structure
designed to provide a free and gratuitous form of education to teach students
about their rights as citizens. When the rights of the parents are
destroyed and are the decisions for children rests in the hands of the State,
the system allowing the State unmitigated power must be destroyed. It
cannot be repaired. Either parents can be trusted to make the best decisions
for their child without the heavy handed bureaucratic and punitive rules of
schools the parents are compelled to support or the system must be changed.
Related Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment