Scoping your teacher’s facebook page
There’s an interesting debate here in The Press this morning about the Teachers Council’s process for monitoring teachers’ registration and how it might relate to teachers’ private lives and especially on-line records:
The new clause in the Teachers Council code brings censure for “any conduct that brings or is likely to bring discredit to the profession”.
PPTA president Robin Duff said the latest extension was especially worrying for young teachers.
“There are things that can happen that are not within the teacher’s control and yet might well lead to concerns,” Duff said.
Both teachers’ unions NZEI and PPTA have opposed the extension in the Council’s powers arguing that teachers are entitled to some privacy outside school hours to live their life as they please.
The council, which is partially elected and partially appointed by government, has the power to register, investigate and de-register teachers. Currently it has registered over 90,000 teachers and has only investigated 240 teachers in its time in existence. It has always had an edgy relationship with teaches, who have recognised the important role it plays in promoting a high quality teaching profession, but have resented it’s tendency at times to set up cumbersome processes of police checks and character references to vet out the very small minority of bad teachers, rather than focusing on supporting the many thousands of good teachers sharing their professional skills and experience.
This latest change extending the council’s ability to censure teachers is a step in the wrong direction. It’s one that panders to people’s false fears about declining moral standards and allows us to judge people on private choices they make outside their workplace, rather than on the high quality skills, teacher education and  experience they bring to the classroom.
July 29th, 2008 at 10:57 am
Well what exactly does it do, as long as the teacher doesn’t do anything illegal then anything else they do should be fine and in fact should be protected by freedom of speech etc. Oh thats right New Zealand doesn’t believe in individual rights since we haven’t done anything to entrench them and we love to abuse them.
Frog what have the Greens done or plan to do in order to entrench the bill of rights and freedom of speech etc. How do you plan to protect the individual both from organizations like this one and from the most dangerous organizartion in the land the New Zealand Parliment.
July 29th, 2008 at 11:09 am
“as long as the teacher doesn’t do anything illegal then anything else they do should be fine”
Parents could well complain that they don’t want a [insert ‘immoral’ practice here] person teaching/indoctrinating their kids.
July 29th, 2008 at 11:26 am
The clause “any conduct that brings or is likely to bring discredit to the profession� can be applied to a far wider range of activities than things that are illegal.
Such as the example quoted by Robin Duff: “If you are unfortunate enough to say ‘I love getting trashed every weekend and I have sex every moment of the day that I can with whoever I can find’ that might be a hell of a joke socially among your friends … but once it’s captured on those sites it does have the potential to stick with you.”
A teacher posting something like that on a social networking site, let alone actually getting trashed every weekend and having sex with whoever they can find, could be considered to “bring discredit to the profession”. So could a teacher regularly visiting brothels, going on stroppy political protests, advocating liberalisation of the cannabis law… in fact a whole range of activities that are all perfectly legal.
Teachers accused of “bringing discredit to the profession” for such activities may be able to successfully argue that they are protected under the freedom of expression and freedom of association provisions of the NZ Bill of Rights Act 1990 - but the point is they shouldn’t have to. They should be subject to disciplinary proceedings only if they have done something that is actually illegal or contrary to their employment agreement.
A catch-all provision such as “bringing discredit to the profession” goes way too far.
July 29th, 2008 at 11:44 am
Thats how it works here in the US except the US has an organization called the ACLU which loves to sue organizations that try stuff like this.
July 29th, 2008 at 7:15 pm
And of course we all want to be more like the US. Everyone does. We’re all just unfortunate people with an American trying to get out. Come on over - we’ll greet you with sweets and flowers.
Love your education system, BTW.
Why is it we condem businesses that are morally reprehensible but stick to the letter of the law, but will defend teachers who are morally reprehensible but stick letter of the law? ‘Hasn’t broken the law’ is the new standard for acceptable behaviour?
July 29th, 2008 at 7:21 pm
Don: If you’re going to San Francisco, be sure to wear some flowers in your hair…
Yeah right!
July 29th, 2008 at 8:05 pm
Don, sorry, that was a bit sarcastic and uncharitable.
Sometimes my feelings about the US get clouded by the actions of the incumbent Admnistration.
Just a pity Arnie is ineligible to stand for President because of some stupid constitutional provision. I have to say that I initially rubbished him as Ronald Raygun Mk II when he was elected, but he has shown some real environmental and social responsibility. Mind you, the GOP would never select him, even if he were eligible. They had to swallow heaps of dead rats to select even McCain.
Maybe Obama can come to the fore and exceed my expectations. Someone needs to!
Thomas Jefferson must have been spinning in his grave continuously since FDR’s last term as President, and it’s time he got some rest!
July 29th, 2008 at 8:26 pm
Toad
Good to see you still have an open mind when it comes to hating the USA.
July 29th, 2008 at 8:43 pm
I’d also be concerned about the process of acceptances into Teachers Colleges. I know someone who was turned down from teachers training because they had been involved in advocating for cannabis law reform because they believe personal and medical use shouldn’t be an imprisonable offence. This person doesn’t use cannabis just stood up for their belief in fundamental human rights. This is apparently a quality we don’t want our teachers to have..
July 29th, 2008 at 9:00 pm
BB said Toad Good to see you still have an open mind when it comes to hating the USA.
Yep, I’d have to say that I’d rate Jefferson as one of the top 5 political leaders of the previous 2 centuries in terms of supporting their people.
Alongside FD Rooseveldt, Mahatma Gandhi, Nelson Mandela and (dare I say it, because I know it will get a negative and possibly vitriolic response) Fidel Castro.
Two Americans (does that further dispel the myth of anti-Americanism?) of my five picks, but note no English or French, because, despite the achievements of Gladstone and de Gaulle, they were both bloody imperialists.
July 30th, 2008 at 9:16 am
You should really have said what you meant by ‘Castro’ toad - did you like the massive tyranny or the posturing?
July 30th, 2008 at 9:59 am
Presumably if Toady admired Castro’s tyranny or his posturing, then the list of other leaders he admired would have included people like Suharto or Mussolini. So I presume what he admired about Castro were things like the way he dramatically improved educational standards, increased life expectancy, reduced infant mortality and made Cuba a player in medical research internationally.
July 30th, 2008 at 10:13 am
I’m not sure i’d even trust what Cuba’s government says about literacy, life expectancy etc, but annecdotally they apparently have a lot doctors. I could not admire a tyrant like that - “In the last weeks of March 2003 the Cuban government sentenced 75 members of the opposition to prison terms of up to 28 years. The activists were charged with “disrespect” toward the Revolution, “treason,â€? and “giving information to the enemy,â€?” etc..yuck.
July 30th, 2008 at 10:14 am
I would think you could find someone else who improved living standards without all that.
July 30th, 2008 at 10:50 am
I’ll give you Jefferson but not FDR, he was an imperialist at heart.
Jefferson was spinning in his grave as soon as he was buried, the US never listened to him and instead listened to Hamilton. The US today is Hamiltons America not Jeffersons.
Of course Don forgot to use the NZ education system so he doesn’t know anything about US History.
July 30th, 2008 at 11:54 am
kahikatea said: So I presume what he admired about Castro were things like the way he dramatically improved educational standards, increased life expectancy, reduced infant mortality and made Cuba a player in medical research internationally.
Yes, that is what I did mean - and in the face of the US-led economic blockade, I really do think his has been a great achievement for the people of Cuba.
I don’t support, however, his execution of thousands of Batista supporters - Mandela had a better idea with the Truth & Reconciliation Commission, although his wholesale adoption of neo-liberal economic theory has left most black South Africans no better off economically than they were under apartheid - or the imprisonment of people for “disrespect towards the revolution.”
StephenR - it’s not just what the Cuban government says - their assertions re Cuban social well-being are supported by, of all agencies, the CIA.
July 30th, 2008 at 11:59 am
Logically that would imply that the CIA did a population census too?
July 31st, 2008 at 6:10 pm
>Sometimes my feelings about the US get clouded by the actions of the incumbent Administration.
Well they *do* give you a choice - you can be for them or against them.
> Just a pity Arnie is ineligible to stand for President because of some stupid constitutional provision.
I had a friend here - a Republican supporting US Marine Captain! - who reckoned if they allowed Arnie to stand, the next president would speak Spanish with English as a second language
As for an Obama victory … take a look at this http://www.gregpalast.com/obama-doesn%e2%80%99t-sweat-he-should/