Access to Facebook for teachers

[sippo]

No access for fb here, but a lot use their phones anyway.

 

Funny story, that on weds during the strikes half the teachers that were in had all gone to the pub at 1pm. The staff on strike were not happy at all, and found out via facebook!

[X-13]

All this "can can be fired for what you say on facebook" stuff makes me want to slap people.

 

If I was out with friends would I be fired for saying "my boss is an idiot"? No, I wouldn't. So, why should facebook be any different?

[localzuk]

That only circumstances in which staff members are allowed to access fb is to investigate incidents of cyberbulling. We have a standalone laptop and 3g dongle solely for this purpose.

 

Same policy here - only a couple of people have unfiltered access to the internet for this purpose. There's no educational need for Facebook in a school as far as I can see.

 

Staff and pupils all have the same level of filtering - there's no need to do it differently, it opens up too many potential problems IMO to have separate filtering options. What happens when a pupil uses a staff laptop? It happens all the time. What happens when the teacher accidentally brings up something inappropriate projected onto the board in their room? There's been several examples of this discussed on here in the last year.

[CyberNerd]

If your teachers' contracts state that they work from 8:30am to 4pm, then you have a point. How much are they getting paid at 10pm when they're marking books at home?

 

thats out of choice, they're not contracted to mark at home

[X-13]

What happens when the teacher accidentally brings up something inappropriate projected onto the board in their room?

 

This happened at another school I worked at. It was equal parts mortifying and hilarious.

 

 

With different levels of filtering you're also running the risk of teachers planning to use websites that are only blocked for students.

 

Then having to listen to them demand that they're unblocked.

[JonWPS]

All this "can can be fired for what you say on facebook" stuff makes me want to slap people.

 

If I was out with friends would I be fired for saying "my boss is an idiot"? No, I wouldn't. So, why should facebook be any different?

 

The issue often isn't what it said, but rather who it reaches. In my experience many people are incredibly naive when it comes to Facebook and other social networking sites, and have little to no comprehension of just how open it is unless you specifically alter your privacy settings. A comment about another member of staff that is subsequently seen by staff members and pupils alike is going to get you in a bit of bother.

 

We've had more issues with staff use of Facebook than pupils.

[X-13]

The issue often isn't what it said, but rather who it reaches.

 

In which case, you're being fired because of gossip.

 

When I'm out I tend to run into parents of past/current students, if I said something to a friend and they overheard it, I doubt I could be fired for it.

 

As far as I'm aware, you can't face disiplinary action for personal opinions. [unless they endanger others.]

 

Just because I dislike someone, it doesn't mean I'm not going to be a professional at work. What I do outside of work has nothing to do with them. [Again, unless it endangers staff or pupils.]

[enjay]

thats out of choice, they're not contracted to mark at home

 

Your teachers are obviously on different contracts to here, as ours don't state working hours. If a teacher wants to mark at home and use school computers for personal interest during non-contact time, that is up to them. We trust them not to abuse this. We would permit them to sit in the staff room reading a book during lunchtime or non-contact lessons, so why not allow them on Facebook in the same time?

[elsiegee40]

All this "can can be fired for what you say on facebook" stuff makes me want to slap people.

 

If I was out with friends would I be fired for saying "my boss is an idiot"? No, I wouldn't. So, why should facebook be any different?

If you said your boss was an idiot while out with your friends and you were overheard by your boss you would expect some problems when you get back to work.

 

If you wrote a letter to the newpaper saying your boss is an idiot and they printed you'd be in trouble.

 

Posting on facebook is like putting it in the newpaper, no matter what your privacy settings are. You can't un-post it. Anybody could read it. And your boss could easily see or it could get back to him. That's why you could be fired.

 

If you wouldn't say it to your boss's face... don't post it or be prepared to accept the consequences.

[enjay]

This happened at another school I worked at. It was equal parts mortifying and hilarious.

We tell staff to check sites before using them with whole classes. We have sometimes had issues of some banner ads which aren't entirely age-appropriate, though.

 

With different levels of filtering you're also running the risk of teachers planning to use websites that are only blocked for students.

We haven't had this problem nearly as much as I feared we might. We do sometimes have problems with sites with video files that turn out to be embedded from YouTube, but even then the impact is low, as such sites are typically used for whole-class teaching rather than individual student access anyway (with exceptions, of course).

[GrumbleDook]

There are 2 issues here ...

1 - Employees of a school having accounts on FaceBook and using them in their own time for personal reasons

2 - Employees of a school having access to FaceBook during work time.

 

The first one is looked at by the Unions who have clearly turned round and said that schools and DfE should not be telling staff what they do during their own time. The counter argument is that professionals in schools and the public sector have a duty to uphold particular standards associated with their job. This is why there has been the recent case of the bloke involved in adult entertainment having an appeal quashed where he was dismissed from a school, where teachers have had inappropriate entries on Social Network sites and have been dismissed. If people are interested in the real stories behind things like this then have a read of the TES. More information is available on the TDA website about professional standards for teachers (including recent changes which affect personal life and outside of school). However, I think this is a bit of a red herring ... even if you tell staff that are not to have it (as in have it in their written and agreed contract of work, not just in a school policy which has been subsequently added without discussions) they will do it anyway.

 

The second is an educational decision. FaceBook is a fantastic tool for engaging with parents. It has to be managed but there are good examples in numerous places. The use of it as an educational resource has been questioned by some and the logistics of it need carefully thinking about, but it can and does work. The usual suggestion is that staff have 2 accounts ... a professional one and a personal one. There is likely to be some overlap but they can have more control with 2 accounts. This was prior to some more recent changes with FaceBook (and the improved granular controls) but you never know when those features allowing control might break or disappear. Personal use in school time is not a technology issue ... but a personnel management issue. *That* decision is from your SLT (based on advice from unions, advisors, etc) and then the operational changes get made.

[X-13]

If you said your boss was an idiot while out with your friends and you were overheard by your boss you would expect some problems when you get back to work.

 

If you wrote a letter to the newpaper saying your boss is an idiot and they printed you'd be in trouble.

 

Posting on facebook is like putting it in the newpaper, no matter what your privacy settings are. You can't un-post it. Anybody could read it. And your boss could easily see or it could get back to him. That's why you could be fired.

 

If you wouldn't say it to your boss's face... don't post it or be prepared to accept the consequences.

 

 

From some reason, I can't copy+paste from this.

 

But it makes for an interesting read. [Not sure how relevant it is though... it's from 2003 and American.]

 

Can you discipline an employee for off-duty misconduct?

 

The answer, it seems, is no. [except in certain circumstances.]

 

We tell staff to check sites before using them with whole classes. We have sometimes had issues of some banner ads which aren't entirely age-appropriate, though.

 

This was less a bad choice of website, more a case of malicious DNS redirection.

Edited December 2, 2011 by X-13

[enjay]

This was less a bad choice of website, more a case of malicious DNS redirection.

 

Ah, I see your problem. Still, does your filtering system not have a live checker which could have picked up that the site had dubious content on it?

[X-13]

Ah, I see your problem. Still, does your filtering system not have a live checker which could have picked up that the site had dubious content on it?

 

Not there. Or if it did, it didn't work.

[enjay]

Not there. Or if it did, it didn't work.

 

That to me would be a problem. Whilst the live checkers on our filters do drive me nuts with their over-twitchiness, I wouldn't want to run a system that didn't have them. A system which relies solely on Filtering Provider Ltd knowing that a site is inappropriate simply isn't sufficient for a school like this where children as young as 5-years-old are given free(ish) reign to browse.

[X-13]

That to me would be a problem. Whilst the live checkers on our filters do drive me nuts with their over-twitchiness, I wouldn't want to run a system that didn't have them. A system which relies solely on Filtering Provider Ltd knowing that a site is inappropriate simply isn't sufficient for a school like this where children as young as 5-years-old are given free(ish) reign to browse.

 

I know... But, sadly, I have no say in these matters.