iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Missouri 'Facebook Law' Limits Teacher-Student Interactions Online, Draws Criticism And Praise

First Posted: 08/03/11 08:58 AM ET Updated: 10/03/11 06:12 AM ET

Facebook Law

If you're a parent, you've probably experienced a certain degree of fear at some point or another about your kids using the Internet. Maybe you peer over their shoulders while they check their Facebook pages, or try to catch glimpses of IM conversations they have with their friends. But do you worry about how they communicate online with their teachers? A new Missouri state law makes the case that you should.

The Amy Hestir Student Protection Act, signed into law on July 14, is 35 pages long, but it is two sentences that are causing quite a stir and earning it the nickname the "Facebook Law."

No teacher shall establish, maintain, or use a work-related internet site unless such site is available to school administrators and the child's legal custodian, physical custodian, or legal guardian.

No teacher shall establish, maintain, or use a nonwork-related internet site which allows exclusive access with a current or former student.

Republican State Sen. Jane Cunningham, who sponsored the bill, told HuffPost that its primary aim is to prevent teachers who have sexually assaulted a student from being placed in another district, a practice the Missouri Department of Education has referred to as “passing the trash” (Hestir was repeatedly assaulted as a student by a middle school teacher who worked in several Missouri school districts.).

Cunningham insisted that she's not preventing teachers from joining social networks or becoming Facebook friends with students. Rather, the idea is to discourage teachers and students from communicating exclusively, without a parent, guardian or school administrator being able to access the message.

"We are by no means trying to stop communication, just make it appropriate and make it available to those who should be seeing it," Cunningham said. "Exclusive communication is a pathway into the sexual misconduct."

Cunningham isn't the only one concerned with online communication between teachers and students of late. In the wake of last week's arrest of an eighth-grade teacher charged with having a sexual relationship with a 14-year-old student, members of the board of education in Georgia's Bulloch County are planning to review school social media policies. The teacher allegedly communicated with the victim through popular social networking sites and by cellphone.

But critics argue that a student struggling with "Hamlet," for instance, misses a learning opportunity when he or she sees a teacher on IM and can't send a message. Or a student who is too shy to raise his hand in class might prefer to email his teacher, but might not feel comfortable knowing his parents or a member of the administration might be reading the email as well.

Many who work in and study education fear the bill is reaching too far.

"This concept of teacher immediacy (approachability, availability and warmth) has been widely studied," Cheri Simonds, a professor of Communications at Illinois State University who has written a textbook on how teachers can effectively communicate with students, said in an email. "Facebook is an avenue for establishing immediacy with students on their level."

According to Simonds, instant access in an educational context has been shown to improve student motivation and cognitive learning. Though her Facebook research has focused on college students, Simonds said that when used properly, the educational benefits of social media are applicable across age groups.

Simonds said she fears that the Missouri law and ones like it will lead to teachers erring on the side of caution and communicating less with students, resulting in weaker relationships. Tony Rothert, the legal director for the ACLU of Eastern Missouri, echoed that sentiment.

“I think that reasonable teachers are going to be afraid to use Facebook or Twitter at all, or anything that allows for requiring mutual consent before you can see what's posted,” Rothert said. He added that the bill "silences a lot more speech than would be necessary to attack the problem."

Others worry that administrators aren't being realistic about what it will take to implement the law and aren't taking into account the potential benefits of incorporating social networking into the classroom.

"The number one technology that students use outside school is social networking sites," said Christine Greenhow, an assistant professor at the College of Education and the College of Information Studies at the University of Maryland. "This is the technology they're going to as their one-stop shop for communication. It's their email, their bulletin board, their online photo album, it's where they do their writing."

For that reason, Greenhow, whose area of expertise is learning in social media contexts, argued that limiting communication between teachers and students only furthers the gap between a student's in-school life and his or her life outside of school.

"We know the best learning happens when teachers are able to integrate students' career interests, passions and the skills that they develop outside of school into the curriculum, and when students are able to take what they're learning in school and build on it outside of school," Greenhow said.

"It seems to assume the worst about teachers, that teachers are sexual predators," he added.

Amy Mascott, a mother of three and former teacher who started Teach Mama, a blog focusing on education, said in an email that she'd be upset if this law affected the school her children attend.

"I feel it immediately colors the teacher-student relationship in a negative way, assuming that all teachers are going to act inappropriately with students," Mascott said.

An alternative, she suggested, would be to increase funding for programs that teach students about online safety.

"Every 21st-century learner should have this kind of direct instruction every year beginning in late elementary school and continuing through 12th grade," she said.

Charol Shakeshaft, professor and chairwoman of the Department of Educational Leadership at Virginia Commonwealth University, who has studied sexual abuse of students by school employees, argued that critics of the bill are overreacting.

"Exclusive and private contact with your students isn't educationally necessary," she said. "In the same way that in a school we would say, 'No, you may not lock yourself into a room with a student,' this law effectively says, 'No you may not lock yourself into a website where only you can get to the student.'"

Shakeshaft pointed to blogs, open message boards, and Facebook fan pages as alternatives to one-on-one messaging and unmonitored emailing.

"It's perfectly possible to have a very valuable, educational teacher-student Facebook site or website that's open, where students can log on ... and from home, parents can also log on."

Parents aren't irrational in worrying about a teacher possibly taking advantage of students. A 2004 report Shakeshaft produced for the Department of Education found that 10 percent of public school children have been the victims of sexual harassment or abuse.

A 2007 Associated Press study found that there were 2,500 allegations of sexual misconduct by teachers, school psychologists, administrators and other school employees across 50 states over the course of five years.

And the Internet is a known tool of choice for those who prey on students. "A lot of the grooming of students for sexual abuse is now happening over the Internet," Shakeshaft said, noting that in the 50 court cases she has been consulted on involving students being sexually abused by school employees, all of them involved communication by email, IM, text or a social network.

"Anything I need to do as a teacher I can do in a public space or a space that can be accessed by people," Shakeshaft said. "If I need to be doing it completely in private, then I shouldn't be doing it."

FOLLOW HUFFPOST PARENTS

If you're a parent, you've probably experienced a certain degree of fear at some point or another about your kids using the Internet. Maybe you peer over their shoulders while they check their Faceboo...
If you're a parent, you've probably experienced a certain degree of fear at some point or another about your kids using the Internet. Maybe you peer over their shoulders while they check their Faceboo...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 1,156
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Bloggers
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (27 total)
01:24 AM on 08/15/2011
The problem with this law is that school districts are making policies that forbid friending students on FB at all, even if you don't have them in class. Many teachers are also parents of children who are friends with kids who are their students. Where does my right to monitor my child and his friends come in? I know it's a public forum in that sense but districts are so afraid of being out of compliance, they are overreacting as well. I had students email me from home at my school email address to send papers in that they couldn't print at home or to ask questions when they were home ill. I also put my cell # and all email addresses on letters to families of kids involved in extra curricular activites so if there was a need, we could contact each other. I had kids text me when we were at a theme park on a field trip so I could monitor them. All of this is now verboten. It's called throwing the baby out with the bathwater, folks. Parents need to monitor their children's social media pages and check their cell phones and their texts. Children who have things to hide will hide things but that's a different issue, isn't it? Does this law mean I have to unfriend my son? I'll fight that one to the mat and then some. And I'll text him too if I want. This law is allowing parents to abdicate responsibility,
10:53 PM on 08/12/2011
Why "former"? If an adult wants to friend his former teacher, what on earth could be wrong with that?
01:26 AM on 08/15/2011
Former refers to students who in higher grades than the teacher teaches, but still in the district, ie, a senior who might have friended her 8th grade cheerleading sponsor because she's still on the squad but isn't a student. Or just made a connection with the teacher in some way and wants to stay in contact.
04:34 PM on 08/11/2011
Unfortunately technology and the law are always going to be at odds. Technology moves so quickly, and lawmakers (and schools!!) are often left making knee-jerk reactions when something bad happens because they are so far behind the process. Instead of reacting, we need to THINK and ACT pro-actively.

As a teacher, the bottom line is this for me: you need to act responsibly and cautiously with regard to your students. Period. And as a parent, I know I am responsible for having open communication with my child about his internet usage (when the time comes).

For a great alternative for teachers who do not want to sacrifice their availability to students in the digital age, Edmodo is a wonderful tool (www.edmodo.com), and one that I use with my own students. Schools and districts, and even individual teachers, can create safe social networking options for their students and faculty, and include parents (who have unique access codes for themselves) to be sure everything is appropriate.

It's not about banning Facebook or gmail or anything like that; it's about making smart decisions and creating safe online environments for kids and teachers to use the technology that can bring so many benefits to their learning.

Do I personally think teachers and students should be Facebook friends? No, but I'm not going to advocate for a law. I would simply advise that blurred boundaries are very risky, and that there are smarter, safer ways to connect with their students digitally.
02:13 PM on 08/11/2011
Much of the coverage of this issue has been incomplete and/or inaccurate, which has led to significant misunderstanding and misplaced anger. I’ve written a post that offers a broader perspective on the law and the potential benefits of restricting interactions between adults and minor children in cyberspace. This piece also provides an alternative that enables individuals and organizations to reap the benefits of digital interactions while better managing the risks. It’s entitled “Can We be Friends? In Cyberspace, ‘No’ May be the Right Answer” and can be accessed via http://tiny.cc/Friends-PDNs.

Courtney Shelton Hunt, PhD
Founder, Social Media in Organizations (SMinOrgs) Community
10:36 AM on 08/10/2011
Where are the parents who should be keeping an eye on these children? Perhaps what we need is a law requiring parents to do their jobs and then we would not need all of these ridiculous laws governing everyone else. And yes, I do have a teenage daughter and when she is using the computer (social networking, e-mailing or whatever) her father and I monitor what she does. As a parent you are supposed to know what is going on, who our child is talking to and what they are talking about. Too bad so many people have given up on parenting and would rather have the government do it for them.....
08:44 PM on 08/07/2011
I have my own Moodle that I use in all of my classes, grades 7-12. Everyone needs an individual user name and password to get to the curriculum. Would the Moodle be illegal under this MO law? Parents may access the Moodle using student user names and passwords.

I have used web 2.0 technologies for years. Must I now make these tools available to everyone. I have no trouble making the material available to parents, but what if the parent doesn't have computer access. Will that child be able to participate in the on-line curriculum?

I don't believe that this law will fulfill its purpose. We do need to do more to protect our children; I don't believe we do enough. We're good at lip service, poor on action. Too many children are hungry, tired, and abused. Too many children starve for affection from an adult. I see it everyday; it's not difficult to see. Let's hope that these children seek attention from adults that will make them safe. In many cases, it is the child's teacher. I truly don't want that responsibility, but what should I do?--let the child have some safe time with a proper role model, or tell the kid to take a hike?
10:49 AM on 08/06/2011
My son's god mother is a former student of mine. She is my friend on facebook. I will not be "defriending" her. My nephew is a friend of mine on facebook. He's on 16 and in high school. I will not be "defriending" him. My god son is in high school and I am friends with him on facebook. I will not be defriending him.

Come and arrest me.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Andy Williams 1
Liberals! 21st century kooky!
04:13 PM on 08/06/2011
Why? You haven't broken any law.
photo
lcr999
scientist
04:39 PM on 08/06/2011
According to the law, just HAVING a facebook account would be illegal, since it allows you to send a private message to ANY other facebook user. Friending is irrelevant.
08:46 PM on 08/05/2011
I'm going to go "friend" one of my former teachers before it becomes illegal. Oh yeah...I'm 29 and I can certainly make that choice on my own without some stupid law telling me I can't.
And I'm friends with my uncle on Facebook...and he was my former principal in elementary school. That should NOT be against the law! I'm also friends with my Dad...he was the PTA president at my school. I'm also friends with my mom...she once subbed in my class. No politician has the right to say that is illegal.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Andy Williams 1
Liberals! 21st century kooky!
04:13 PM on 08/06/2011
What law told you that you can't?
06:54 PM on 08/06/2011
Well according to this new law I wouldn't be able to friend my former teacher since I am a former student.
photo
lcr999
scientist
06:28 PM on 08/05/2011
"No teacher shall establish, maintain, or use a nonwork-related internet site which ALLOWS exclusive access with a current or former student."

This is just dumb beyond measure.

Note , for example, if HuffPo had a feature where you could contact other users directly via an "email" type feature, it would be impossible for teachers to participate in Huff Po even, because you would have to assume that there are students on it, somewhere.

Furthermore, facebook ALLOWS you to send private messages to any other facebook member, you don't have to be their friend. Therefore, by this law, teachers can not even have ANY facebook page, since it would ALLOW them to communicate with their students.

All the while it says nothing about email, phone, or personal conversations.

It just shows that the Missouri legislature is full of old men who have no understanding of technology
08:15 PM on 08/05/2011
I agree...this law is TOO vague and unconstitutional!
photo
lcr999
scientist
11:45 PM on 08/05/2011
Not to mention Gmail. Gmail is a web site that allows one to communicate privately to others, including students. Most students have gmail accounts. Therefore it would be illegal for a teacher to have any gmail account, personal or otheriwse.
02:48 PM on 08/05/2011
The law makers do make a reasonable argument about why it's needed. When I have children, I would feel uncomfortable if my child/children have relations other than activities, homework..,etc.

There can be other alternatives like schools having their own social networking service tied to the actually school.
07:52 PM on 08/05/2011
You would have a problem with your child/children friending their favorite teacher after they are 18? My uncle is a retired principal/teacher and many of his former students (who are all over 30 now) have sought him out on Facebook. What is wrong with that? What if a teacher has a relative in their class? They can't friend their relative...ever? What if a former student becomes a colleague? They can never be friends on Facebook? Come on. This is totally infringing on teachers' rights.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Andy Williams 1
Liberals! 21st century kooky!
04:15 PM on 08/06/2011
What does this have to do with anything? A former student is defined as someone 18 or younger AND has not graduated.
01:18 PM on 08/05/2011
Yet another case of 'people don't understand statistics so we'll use statistics to scare people'. The article claims that '10 percent of public school children have been the victims of sexual harassment or abuse'. NOTHING is said about where or how the harassment/abuse occurred, how it is connected to school, teachers or social media. Remove that claim until it is clarified and the rationale for this bill disappears.

I'm not suggesting that teachers are perfect or immune to corruption, but let's use a little logic to analyze these statements before legislating, and while we're at it separate two completely different issues. Sexual harassment is an important subset of sexual abuse, but in teens peer harassment is incredibly common and often has a sexual component. Consider that as a separate, related problem. The specific remedy, binding teachers does not address that problem but specifically teacher sexual abuse. How big a problem is that? Not nearly as big a problem as abuse by relations and family friends. But let's pretend that ugly truth does not exist and chase after the specters of teachers, strangers, anyone else.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Andy Williams 1
Liberals! 21st century kooky!
04:38 PM on 08/06/2011
It is supported. Notice where the claim is made that it refers to the study that produced the stat. In that study, the claim is supported.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Ayesha Khan
07:51 AM on 08/05/2011
Filing cases and getting the laws passed is a very good and an important step-- but here i fail to understand that it was due on Facebook to be Vigilant on any Profane or abusive communication between people--- Facebook has all the means to monitor what kind of communication is exchanged between people and moreover it is the top most Priority that remain on Social network to observe any such activities that are violating the Laws or Moral Conduct--- Social Networks play a much more significant role than the Media..This Issue could have been solved further Reported to the authorities by Facebook or any other network--- And if we hear that Social Networks remain un informed about the communication between people ---- Its hard to believe ----In fact Social networks can play a better role than any other institute to trace the discrepancies and bring them into limelight--- or else what is the main purpose???
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Andy Williams 1
Liberals! 21st century kooky!
04:39 PM on 08/06/2011
It wasn't because of Facebook, and quite frankly, it's the hysterics of teachers and their like that have brought Facebook into the conversation. Ironically, nothing done on Facebook is illegal for a teacher to engage in.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Ayesha Khan
06:34 PM on 08/06/2011
And what makes you think that i had any intentions of bring Facebook into it??--- I advise that you must read the Issue first and then my comments--- .No sane person can imagine that a net work of high repute like Facebook would indulge in such activities-- for which they have faced many allegations previously as well, and not only this but many others too. People before pointing a Finger on Facebook forget to Realize one Simple Question and that is, WHY WOULD THEY DO IT ?--Yes Think again, Why any Network do it ,INTENTIONALLY?-. in my Comments the Central idea was a Suggestion to Facebook that they can play a better role in restricting the Issue But don't forget Social Networks have their own limitations-. it is not possible for them to remain involved while handling around Billion people..In my comments Sarcasm was involved against the Teachers...Parents and the Related Authorities that they remain oblivious to the fact that whats going on between their kids and the Teachers who can be regarded as parents--- You please Read the Post Carefully, and then my Comments--- then u might understand---When i am Disgusted by the Attitude of the Teachers and the Guardians---Then i turn to Facebook and say----- "Now it is Due on You... you do something --You have the means" ----But once again Facebook being the Largest Social Network of the World has its own Limitations----------------
01:42 AM on 08/15/2011
The teachers aren't being hysterical. They are following the directives of their districts who are interpreting a poorly written and thought out state law. Apparently you haven't read the law or are unfamiliar with how FB works. "Nothing done of Facebook is illegal for a teacher to engage in" send a message to Jane Doe; Chat w/ Jane Doe. BOTH of those are exclusive forms of communication allowed by FB. Sending a message is allowed to people w/ whom one isn't friends. The law in spirit, pure spirit, of wanting to protect kids is great however it assumes ALL teachers to be predatory and is based on a tragic situation where passing the trash happened. Where was DESE and the State Board on that? Why wasn't there a hearing? That's a whole other kettle of fish. This law was hastily conceived, ill thought out and poorly written. OTher than that, it's fine.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
BuckoForce
10:16 PM on 08/04/2011
MO, this is a bad law. Bad teachers will always get caught up, you don't need to stop the good ones in the process.
01:46 AM on 08/15/2011
Amen. Predators have always found ways to groom and prey upon kids. Do I have to friend my students to be a good teacher? No. I communicated w/ kids for 20 years before FB and texting. It's just insulting to be lumped in with the ilk. And don't hand me, "If you have nothing to worry about then why do you need to talk to kids privately?" All that has to be done for parents to monitor their kids is to friend them and require their password to FB to check on them. My son loses his laptop PERIOD if he ever changes his password w/o giving it to me. Until he's 18. PERIOD.
07:35 PM on 08/04/2011
Is there a reason why teachers were singled out? How about priests or other clergy? How about doctors? Lawyers? Politicians? In recent years, haven't all of these been involved in inappropriate behavior with students? So why aren't they subject to being monitored? Or is there a value in confidential communications with someone you can trust that transcends concerns about the occasional child abuser?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Andy Williams 1
Liberals! 21st century kooky!
04:24 PM on 08/06/2011
Not sure how many real professionals your kids are confronted by each day, but I'm required to provide my child for schooling each year.

Of course, teachers are not being monitored, just barred from certain contacts with the youth whom they have the ability to manipulate on a daily basis.
01:52 AM on 08/15/2011
You do understand that if a student is at home sick and wants to send an email to a teacher, that constitutes private communication? Again, you seem to assume that all teachers are trying to manipulate students.
07:11 PM on 08/04/2011
Wow.

Why don't we get back to establishing and honoring boundaries?

Ooh, right -- not PC.
08:05 PM on 08/05/2011
What is wrong with a person over 18 choosing to friend a former teacher? I'm "friends" on Facebook with several girls I used to baby-sit. They are in college now and can certainly decide for themselves if they want to be my "friend" or not. In many small districts, teachers have to teach relatives or even kids that are friends with their own children. It is not fair to say they cannot ever "friend" any of these people again just because they taught them for one year. My friend's father had to teach his own son because it was a small district. So, they can now never be friends on Facebook because of this law? This is not about establishing and honoring boundaries. This is completely infringing on teachers' rights. I agree that teachers shouldn't be "friends" with current students but former students? That is a different story.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Andy Williams 1
Liberals! 21st century kooky!
04:25 PM on 08/06/2011
Again, not prohibited.