Schools
Teachers, Students Shouldn't Mix on Facebook, School Officials State
A proposed update to a District 304 policy on teacher-student e-mails and cell phone calls would add social media sites to restricted communications channels.
A proposed revision to School District 304’s policy on staff and student use of electronic communications would formally prohibit teachers from contacting students through social media sites.
“We want our staff to use district-approved communication avenues when communicating with students,” said Assistant Superintendent Craig Collins at Monday’s Policy Committee meeting. “We do not want teachers and students to communicate through personal cell phones, e-mail addresses or websites.”
While the Board of Education approved a ban on teachers using personal e-mail accounts or cell phones to contact students in 2006, that policy needs to be updated and expanded to include social media sites, Collins said.
Find out what's happening in Genevawith free, real-time updates from Patch.
“A lot has changed since 2006,” he noted. “Most people didn’t know what a ‘Tweet’ was then. Facebook was just entering most students’ worlds. We don’t want to put any students at risk by allowing any of their personal information or pictures to get on a (teacher’s) social media site.”
The policy would require teachers to block student access to their personal pages on Facebook, MySpace, Live Journal and other social networking websites and to avoid posting on students’ social media pages. Classes could put up their own web pages on district web servers on which they could post blogs, questions and other educational communications, if district officials approve the web page creation.
Find out what's happening in Genevawith free, real-time updates from Patch.
“If (an academic) department had a Facebook page, students and teachers could do wall postings about class assignments, as long as they couldn’t use it for private communications,” suggested Board of Education member Matt Henry.
Teachers could ask for permission to contact students using nonmonitored electronic communications if class circumstances require it, Collins noted.
“They would have to have a clear educational purpose, be transparent and tell their building supervisors,” he said. “There would have to be a clear reason why a teacher would contact a student privately without the parents’ knowledge. There have been too many examples where teachers (in other districts) have crossed the line.”
The board is scheduled to vote on the policy change July 18.
