| I am on record in the earlier thread about this incident https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5777578 saying that the first news report sounded like John Dryden is an unusually thoughtful social studies teacher, and that he was just relating the general concepts that he is hired to teach his students to a real-world situation facing the students. Even after reading the follow-up report submitted to open this thread, I'm not at all sure that Dryden was trying to undermine the survey process. Here's a key passage from the middle of the story submitted here: "Dryden, a social studies teacher, told three of his classes that they had a Fifth Amendment right to not incriminate themselves when they took a social-emotional learning survey April 18. Some of the 34 questions asked students about their drug and alcohol use, as well as about their emotions. Their names were on the surveys, as it was intended to identify students who could use help, according to school district officials. Those whose answers raised red flags were called in to the school's student services workers, including social workers and counselors. "Barshinger said there was no Fifth Amendment issue, for several reasons. Once students' names were on them, he said, they would have become student records and subject to student privacy laws. And students cannot incriminate themselves because, even if the district shared the information with police, police can't prosecute based on that, he said. They are only allowed to arrest students if they are harming other students, such as in a fight, or if the student is in possession of drugs or alcohol, Barshinger said. "Board president Cathy Dremel, speaking on behalf of the board, said Dryden 'mischaracterized' the efforts of fellow teachers and administrators, some of who had worked on a committee for a year to find a survey instrument that would assess students' risky behavior. "'The board will not support any employees giving students false impressions about those who come here every day' to work for their best interests, she said." I am a lawyer by training. I don't actively practice law currently, but I stay alert to the law related to K-12 education, which was my motivation for studying law. In my experience, school district officials are often VERY BADLY advised on what the law is, and their default assumption is that they can do what they want, and hide what they are trying to do from parents who have the actual legal authority to guide their children's educations. I wouldn't take these kinds of statement from the district superintendent or from the school board president as the last word on what the legal consequences of the student survey might be. I think another Hacker News participant said in the earlier thread that he lives in the district and would report on what he observed at the school board meeting about the survey. I'm not completely sure that this latest news story, which fills in more details that weren't reported in the first story, settles the issue of whether or not teacher Dryden's behavior was appropriate under the circumstances. |
If I were asked to administer this survey, I would have the same red flags. A survey asking these kinds of questions, with names on them, is pretty serious and students deserve to know what is going to be done with the results of such a survey. They also need to know they have the right to make their own decisions about how much personal information to share.
As a teacher, I would expect this kind of survey to be pretty heavily front-loaded. So either the administration did not prepare staff well enough about administering this survey, or this teacher was not paying attention when it was discussed ahead of time.
Many people in education are afraid of being perfectly honest with students. We need more openness in education, not less.