The teacher should be in hot water for teaching the 5th amendment incorrectly. From the text of the amendment: "No person shall be... compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself..." The 5th amendment gives people the right to refuse to testify, as a witness , in a way that might incriminate oneself. Relatedly, it excludes self-incriminating statements in certain circumstances from evidence in crimi…
Teacher under fire for informing kids of their Fifth Amendment rights
61–70 of 202 posts
Re: Teacher under fire for informing kids of their Fifth Amendment rights
#62Earlier quoted context omitted.
Never blame on malice what can be blamed on incompetence. In this case my capacity for outrage is exhausted. I've been through too many permutations of this particular type of outrage that this is in line with my expectations. And yes, if the survey is as described, the teacher should be commended. Not punished. But that's out of my hands, though if someone gives me someone to email, I will do so.
Malice and incompetence are equally dangerous and harmful.
Re: Teacher under fire for informing kids of their Fifth Amendment rights
#63Off-topic, but how does it work that when I load that site I get an advertisement for The Lorax ( http://i.imgur.com/y6eke4T.jpg ), a character with whom John Dryden happens to share several key features? I understand showing ads by keyword (the alcohol ad as alcohol is mentioned in the article several times...) but facial similarity based advertising?! I'm speechless.
Re: Teacher under fire for informing kids of their Fifth Amendment rights
#64Earlier quoted context omitted.
What is the expected opinion on that. I'm not from the US.
For a school the expected opinion is that less guns is better.
Re: Teacher under fire for informing kids of their Fifth Amendment rights
#65Why are questions asked of students copyrighted so as to not allow any visibility to parents? If I had a child required to answer potentially incriminating questions at school I would want public scrutiny, otherwise this becomes a kind of secret inquisition.
If my daughter answered that she was using drugs on a survey, with her name on it, which was then publicly released, it could have serious ramifications. That information could do serious harm to her future prospects if anyone grabbed the data and started making hiring decisions. Or grabbed the data and started blackmailing. If I had a daughter, anyway. Frankly, the schools shouldn't have that information, it's dange…
They have nightmares of being on the stand in court and asked questions like "are you sure you did everything you could to prevent the disaster?"...At least this is probably how testing and psych screening company sold them the packet.
Now their stupidity is also a blessing. If just someone could manipulate them into being afraid of your scenario. Being sued for collecting too much private info about its students. What if they get hacked or someone breaks into the office and steals all those answer sheets with all kinds of strange confessions? Law suits from parents is supposedly this dark deep evil always lurking in their minds. Just need to re-frame the problem so that they see collecting data = increasing risks of getting sued and voila, temporary win.
As a side note, someone on Reddit mentioned taking a similar test (but supposedly anonymous, I say "supposedly" as teacher often can tell the students by handwriting). and putting the most outrageous answers they could in the boxes, mostly for fun. I realized I would have probably have done back then the same thing, just to mess up their statistics. What if didn't end up being anonymous, it leaks and now it is attached to my name for life. Good luck explaining every employer who runs background checks.
Re: Teacher under fire for informing kids of their Fifth Amendment rights
#66But with their rights, troubles and teenage rebellion - how dare they disrupt the perfect teaching set up by bureaucracy by being themselves.
The fact that a survey is needed means that the system has already failed the students. And the idea of it being non anonymous means that the persons responsible have no idea at all how to deal with children. The school is there to guide the young ones during one very hard period in a person's life. It should be relationship based on trust not intimidation. But instead we get administrators that think of themselves as sheriffs that must be tough on crime.
But the mantra is protect the children (which we do for ourselves) and not do something good for the children.
Re: Teacher under fire for informing kids of their Fifth Amendment rights
#67"But John Dryden said he's not the point. He wants people to focus on the issue he raised: Whether school officials considered that students could incriminate themselves with their answers to the survey that included questions about drug and alcohol use." To me, that sounds like an unusually thoughtful social studies teacher. He is relating the general concepts that he is hired to teach his students to a real-world s…
I really want to understand this "proprietary information" excuse the school is using to justify not releasing the survey. Certainly the kids can go home and tell their parents what they saw (and some have). The kids didn't sign an NDA, they saw it, so why can't we see it? This story is happening in my town. There is a public hearing tomorrow night and I plan on attending.
The public (parents in particular) ought to have the right to know everything that their kids see.
Re: Teacher under fire for informing kids of their Fifth Amendment rights
#68"But John Dryden said he's not the point. He wants people to focus on the issue he raised: Whether school officials considered that students could incriminate themselves with their answers to the survey that included questions about drug and alcohol use." To me, that sounds like an unusually thoughtful social studies teacher. He is relating the general concepts that he is hired to teach his students to a real-world s…
I really want to understand this "proprietary information" excuse the school is using to justify not releasing the survey. Certainly the kids can go home and tell their parents what they saw (and some have). The kids didn't sign an NDA, they saw it, so why can't we see it? This story is happening in my town. There is a public hearing tomorrow night and I plan on attending.
Re: Teacher under fire for informing kids of their Fifth Amendment rights
#69Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Stupid, yes. But I think it is likely that the school has a real legal barrier to sharing the survey. It could be. It could also be that the people who dreamed up this survey saw that legal barrier as a convenience. You can administer an unfair and potentially useless, invasive, survey, to your students, AND you have a "reason" not to tell the media, too! Had I been a student at this school, I would have put my sur…
Never blame on malice what can be blamed on incompetence. In this case my capacity for outrage is exhausted. I've been through too many permutations of this particular type of outrage that this is in line with my expectations. And yes, if the survey is as described, the teacher should be commended. Not punished. But that's out of my hands, though if someone gives me someone to email, I will do so.
So, does the early bird get the worm or do good things come to those who wait? We're maybe too inclined to just assert these sorts of things as fact. (This includes me.)
Re: Teacher under fire for informing kids of their Fifth Amendment rights
#70Off-topic, but how does it work that when I load that site I get an advertisement for The Lorax ( http://i.imgur.com/y6eke4T.jpg ), a character with whom John Dryden happens to share several key features? I understand showing ads by keyword (the alcohol ad as alcohol is mentioned in the article several times...) but facial similarity based advertising?! I'm speechless.
Maybe a coincidence? There's also mention of 'kids', 'school', 'students', etc. However, I'd guess the technology is there to do facial recognition... not sure how that's effective for any advertiser's end goals though... except maybe certain cases of demographics, like if you are on a body building website then you show ads that have people with big necks.