Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Teacher under fire for informing kids of their Fifth Amendment rights

dailyherald.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 202 posts

Re: Teacher under fire for informing kids of their Fifth Amendment rights

#191

Post by nijk »

csense wrote: post #163
genwin wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The system is designed so that each crime breaks multiple laws, and the laws are easily broken. Keira Wilmot faced multiple felonies, for example. She broke the law when she didn't immediately report her crime to the authorities.

> laws are easily broken The video I linked discusses this very issue for a few minutes starting at 5:20. At 6:55 he talks about how possession of a lobster can be illegal: "It doesn't matter if he's dead or alive. It doesn't matter if you killed it or it died of natural causes. It doesn't even matter if you acted in self defense! Did you know that? Did you know it could be a federal offense to be in possession of a…

Th second half of that video series is a police officer saying "we aren't trying to ensnare innocent people, but, yeah, everything that lawyer said is good advice.".

Re: Teacher under fire for informing kids of their Fifth Amendment rights

#192

Post by betterunix »

rayiner wrote: post #95
josh_fyi wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The right not to incriminate yourself is a basic civil right. The Fifth Amendment is a codification of the right, which was given to you, as our Founding Fathers saw it, by the laws of nature. The Amendment may refer only to some circumstances, but the right was prior to it. So, the teacher was correct to treat the students about their basic, God-given rights.

Whose God?

Don't be pedantic. It is a figure of speech that the founding fathers used.

Re: Teacher under fire for informing kids of their Fifth Amendment rights

#193

Post by genwin »

aidenn0 wrote: post #182
scott_s wrote: post #180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Indeed it was, and I was in school when it became that broad. I even wrote about it in the school newspaper. But I still have not heard of a school that says "You used alcohol over the weekend in an activity that we agree is completely unrelated to school, so we will expel you."

http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/nation/2010-01-28-studen... [edit] even more apropos: http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=1240760...

Good ones. Also search for: The suit was based on a claim by sophomore Blake Robbins that school officials reprimanded him for “improper behavior” based on photos the [school issued] computer secretly took of the boy at home last fall.

Granted it's not zero tolerance because he wasn't expelled.

Re: Teacher under fire for informing kids of their Fifth Amendment rights

#194

Post by wnight »

betterunix wrote: post #177
aidenn0 wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sort-of. If the copies came with a license agreement forbidding you giving a copy to the press, then you might be liable if you did. Furthermore if members of the press got a copy, they might be forbidden from publishing the test in full. A sample single question from the test (alluding to illegal activity) would likely be fair-use.

"Sort-of. If the copies came with a license agreement forbidding you giving a copy to the press, then you might be liable if you did." Except that you do not need a license unless you are making copies. The only reason you see licenses with software is that the process of installing software is making a copy of that software. Books do not come with licenses, because you do not copy a book in order to read it. "Furthe…

Actually, software licenses aren't required to simply use a program - though you can certainly obtain a copy by licensing it.

Essentially, copies made that are inherently required for the expected function of the work (to the HD if required, to RAM, to screen, etc) aren't copyright violations. http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/117

Re: Teacher under fire for informing kids of their Fifth Amendment rights

#195

Post by wnight »

bashinator wrote: post #189
CurtMonash wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's copyrighted information. How much could be released under "fair use" is questionable. Schools abuse copyright in some ways, and probably compensate by being rigorous in others. Further, if it comes from a company that also offers more conventional achievement kinds of tests, it may come with bloodthirsty NDAs, as a matter of habit for such companies.

Can you legally hold students (minors) to an NDA? I wonder what kind out outcome there would be if a 9th-grader photographed and published this survey.

DMCA takedown. Expulsion. Streissand effect. Hilarity.

They couldn't keep it online, but couldn't be seriously censured for trying, and they wouldn't be alone.

Re: Teacher under fire for informing kids of their Fifth Amendment rights

#196

Post by alanctgardner2 »

LanceH wrote: post #102
alanctgardner2 wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's likely a real psychometric survey that the school pays per copy for, and so the company that produced it (like Pearson) treats it as their IP. They do the same thing to psychologists: sell them a survey, and then 'refills' of the questionaire so that they're only allowed to administer the test n times before paying again. It's an interesting problem, because the companies involved fund studies to improve the dia…

And the education machine buys this stuff non-stop. At the same time every individual school will have dozens of people with graduate degrees. Much of those graduate degrees will be based on classes and research about how to acquire exactly this type of data. And yet, they are unable to make these things themselves and go out and purchase them in the most expensive way possible. The amount of waste involved in the ed…

That's like saying that because hospitals have radiation techs, they should save money by building their own MRIs.

I was trying very carefully not to say that there's no value in these surveys, because they are designed by experts: PhDs, running statistically significant experiments. Sample sizes on the ones I've looked at are in the hundreds, which is pretty huge for a psych experiment. Just slapping one together based on a few classes you took would be irresponsible and probably not very useful as a diagnostic. My complaint is mostly that since we're publicly funding these experiments anyways (one government body buys them from a company, who gives some money to another government body), we should cut out the middle-man.

Re: Teacher under fire for informing kids of their Fifth Amendment rights

#197

Post by gambomb »

yakiv wrote: post #69
btilly wrote: post #41

Earlier 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.

> Never blame on malice what can be blamed on incompetence. 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.)

He messed up the quote a bit, omitting an important qualifier: "Never ascribe to malice that which is adequately explained by incompetence" -- Napoleon (allegedly) I don't think I need to explain how this shifts the meaning.

Re: Teacher under fire for informing kids of their Fifth Amendment rights

#198

Post by scott_s »

genwin wrote: post #193
aidenn0 wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/nation/2010-01-28-studen... [edit] even more apropos: http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=1240760...

Good ones. Also search for: The suit was based on a claim by sophomore Blake Robbins that school officials reprimanded him for “improper behavior” based on photos the [school issued] computer secretly took of the boy at home last fall. Granted it's not zero tolerance because he wasn't expelled.

Lets be clear: neither of those stories do what I said.

I'm not, and never was, happy with the overreaching disciplinary actions taken by school systems. I think it tends to be reactionary and counter-productive. But your claims are still not accurate. While I disagree with the policies, and I think they are bad, they are as bad as your claims.

Re: Teacher under fire for informing kids of their Fifth Amendment rights

#199

Post by leephillips »

tss20147 wrote: post #188
leephillips wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What obligations as a school system employee did he not fulfill?

According to the article there was a specific script to be followed when distributing the survey. By informing the students of their 5th amendment rights he deviated from this script. Beyond this it was obviously the intent of the school system for students to complete the survey fully and honestly. He knowingly took actions which he knew might lead students to not doing so.

The article didn't say that he did not read the script - just that he also offered information about the 5th amendment. That's not an instance of failing to fulfill his obligations. Also, even if he acted in a way to thwart the "intent" of the school system administration, which has not been demonstrated, it is not at all clear that this constitutes a failure to fulfill his obligations as an employee. It might be that his obligations should be interpreted as including the thwarting of the intent of the administration in some instances. Just as a soldier in the American army is obligated to disobey an illegal order.

Re: Teacher under fire for informing kids of their Fifth Amendment rights

#200

Post by nsxwolf »

nsxwolf wrote: post #185
nsxwolf wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Standing here now, waiting for it to start. About 100 people here so far.

So there were more than 100 people crowded into a small room and spilling out into the hallway.

Some highlights:

- A father who made a point of stating he disagrees politically with Dryden but vehemently supports him and his views on the 5th amendment

- A mother complained the "opt out" email that was sent did not mention the self incriminating nature of the questions. She was concerned about the lack of confidentiality and the overall effectiveness of a survey that kids had admitted lying on.

- A student noted the inconsistency in teaching children about their rights academically, only to deny them in practice.

In the end, I was impressed with this community's response and how this issue managed to bring so many political opposites together in support of our rights.

Too bad it all fell on deaf ears, though.

Post reply on HN