Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I'm seeing and hearing a lot of sob stories about the "cruelty" of private groups and gossip and the like, so let me present the other side of this issue.
I have seen and experienced this phenomenon of people impersonating people myself, and seen it happen to others.
--------cut--------
The point I'm trying to make is that some of you are looking at this whole thing as, "Oh, what's the big deal? It's just a cute, harmless little thing that he did, kind of like a prank." But if you've been on the receiving end of this type of thing, you know that when people resort to impersonating others to get over on others, it's never innocent. It comes from a dark place. And the people who do it are always very devious and calculating about it. They don't just throw up a fake profile and call it a day. They will pretend to be this person to the hilt, will steal profile pictures, will impersonate the way they think the person they're impersonating might talk, will create fake updates (as in, "Just celebrated Johnny's third birthday!" when they don't have children). They'll wax poetic about their hopes and dreams.
In the case of this teacher, I have no doubt that this is what he did, because that's what every one of these types do. Someone made a comment suggesting that the people who friended this guy were being stupid, naive or foolish but what this person isn't understanding is that this teacher probably went to great lengths to impersonate a "mom" and may have done and said some cunning things to gain everyone's trust. He may have complimented some of the members of the group, might've shared fake personal triumphs, might've given motherly advice, might have even initially agreed with some of the criticisms the group had of him to make it look like he was "one of them."
Given all that, this is why I think the resignation was appropriate, as well as the fears of the mother who reported him. Online impersonation is a tool of choice for the devious and is a huge flag that the person who does it has some kind of personality flaw or emotional/mental issue.
Wanting to know what is actually being said about you in a Facebook group after someone tells you are the subject in multiple negative posts is not the same as catfishing. Even responding to some of those posts or posters is not the same as catfishing. In catfishing someone proactively creates a false account to form a false social relationship and relishes the collateral harm they create, in this case the false account was created in reaction to harm caused to him by others.
Would I do what he did? No. Would I be so thin skinned that I would even consider it? No. Do I think he was beyond stupid for using his school email account? Absolutely. But, do I think he is some budding psychopath that schoolchildren or their mamas need to be protected from? Nope. The guy is not tenured, he was probably somewhat justified in being afraid or concerned by the trouble this closed group may or may not have been creating for him - he wasn't paranoid or psychologically unbalanced based on his concern. His problem, of course, was that he responded to it inappropriately.
Listen, if I was the guy's principal there is no way I would renew his contract. To start with I would be concerned that he had managed to anger enough parents that they were making those ugly posts, although you have to take into account teachers who cut kids out of sports or plays can unfairly become the targets of bitter parents. The mere fact that he was stupid enough to use his school email, which meant he could easily be caught, would mean to me he does not on a basic level understand to student proof his actions - middle school and high school teachers/administrators will know what I mean by that statement. However, I do not think his actions, at least from what we have been told, warrant a mid-year firing or encouraging a mid-year voluntary departure. Mid-year teacher changes are hard on students.
__________________
When I post in bold red that is moderator action and, per the TOS, can only be discussed through Direct Message.
I keep telling young teachers that social media can be a career killer. This guy used his school email address, of all idiotic things, to create the duplicate account, so the district does have standing in, shall we say, encouraging his resignation.
I am troubled by the reporting mother's response, to me she seems to be on a vendetta against the guy. I know a lot of teachers that have a Facebook page or twitter account page that the general public, including students and school officials, can see and a duplicate account under a fictitious name that operates as their real social media, so I find some of the reactions that doing so automatically means he was up to no good.
Doesn't seem like good grounds for firing someone to me, although I don't know what he posted there. If it was just defense of his theater program or perhaps some snarkiness, he hardly sounds like a threat to kids. And it's not against the law to have a fake facebook profile.
What's even weirder to me is that the person who reported him is not a mom. She doesn't have a kid in the program, so was she in the private FB parent groups? If yes, why? If no, why did she stick her nose in it?...
If she's a taxpayer, she's not "sticking her nose in it" but has every right to bring it up. If she's wrong it can be pointed out in the proper forum. If she's right it needs to be resolved.
Quote:
Originally Posted by North Beach Person
You are correct, but once again I have to say I'm curious about these "accusations" from the closed parent group.
And nothing gives parents the right to make accusations about a teacher and then hide. As I said, they'd come in and drop them on the Principal and he is going to have to follow a due process procedure.
If the group were closed and he had to infiltrate his way in, then they were hardly accusations. At least from the story it didn't sound like anyone had made accusations. Just gossip on the forums.
And yes, parents do need the right and mechanism to make "accusations" anonymously. As a parent there have been a lot of things that concerned me about the schools and some teachers. I've seen, and my kids have experienced, the retaliation put upon kids that even a simple disagreement brings. I'm not even talking about serious accusations but something as simple as disagreeing over the amount of homework creating "punishment" on the kids whose parents brought it up. So yes, depending on the culture around a particular school, I can understand anonymous closed sites.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mnseca
Doesn't seem like good grounds for firing someone to me, although I don't know what he posted there. If it was just defense of his theater program or perhaps some snarkiness, he hardly sounds like a threat to kids. And it's not against the law to have a fake facebook profile.
Kind of makes you wonder if there was something else going on if it got that many parents upset and a teacher worried enough about his job that he'd resort to something like this. Parents don't have that much power unless there was something strongly negative going on, enough so that would lead to a mid year termination.
The point I'm trying to make is that some of you are looking at this whole thing as, "Oh, what's the big deal? It's just a cute, harmless little thing that he did, kind of like a prank."
FTR, I have hardly seen anyone looking at it like this???
Quote:
Originally Posted by EastFlatbush
Given all that, this is why I think the resignation was appropriate, as well as the fears of the mother who reported him.
The person who reported him wasn't a parent. What was SHE doing in the "private parents' group"?
Quote:
Originally Posted by tnff
If she's a taxpayer, she's not "sticking her nose in it" but has every right to bring it up. If she's wrong it can be pointed out in the proper forum. If she's right it needs to be resolved.
LOL yes of course. Let's bring "the taxpayer" into this.
It was a virtual coffee klatch. It would be the same if it were a virtual teacher's lounge. The theater teacher got nosy, and he thought he had found a workaround. They were tricked. He's paid the price.
Wanting to know what is actually being said about you in a Facebook group after someone tells you are the subject in multiple negative posts is not the same as catfishing. Even responding to some of those posts or posters is not the same as catfishing. In catfishing someone proactively creates a false account to form a false social relationship and relishes the collateral harm they create.
Oh, you mean like how he friended people at Facebook and everything using false accounts, so that he could gain their trust and make inroads into a group he wasn't allowed to join? And then started arguing with everyone and leaving inflammatory comments?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oldhag1
...in this case the false account was created in reaction to harm caused to him by others.
What harm caused to him? There's nothing in that article that suggesting anything like that. The article literally says that "people" were telling him that people in the group were saying negative things about him at some group. He tried joining the group to find out what people were saying. When he was rejected, he then went through this bizarre, elaborate scheme to make inroads into this group by friending people (posing as two different women) then getting into arguments with everyone.
So if there was any "harm" caused to him, it was the emotional pain any person would feel if he decided to muscle his way into private conversations, where it's natural for people to backbite and gossip. That's all. But they weren't doing anything to him outside of this group other than talking. They weren't using this group to organize his dismissal or try to get him fired or anything.
BTW, here's another red flag that something is off about him:
Quote:
Herman said he did not intentionally Facebook “friend” students, but said that it was a possibility.
“It (Facebook) was suggesting people and I just added. I couldn’t say that I didn’t. I added random people to make it seem like I was a real person in the community so they would let me into the group,” he said.
In other words, "I didn't intentionally Facebook students (whose profiles would've clearly shown that they were minors and teenagers. Facebook threw these suggestions in my face and I just clicked add. It's not my fault I friended them; Facebook made me."
And ....? Why does it even matter if there is or is not a Facebook account or if it is closed or not?
We have had this issue recently in our school.
Our concerns were two fold, first they used the schools name for their closed group and didn’t allow some parents in. They then proceeded to conduct official PTSA business through the closed group. That is not acceptable.
Second, parents in the closed group have tried to use comments made as “evidence” with regards to school decisions; I.e. disciplinary actions, class placements, etc. For example a student in my class took a quiz one day, handed it back 20 mins later, blank, and said he “forgot” there was a quiz. When I gave him the zero, his mother said he was not responsible because someone in the closed Facebook group had told her the quiz was postponed despite the quiz being announced in class, on the class website and on the class calendar. She tried to claim that this closed Facebook account, run completely autonomous from the school was an official source of information because parents used it to exchange info and that somehow the school is responsible for what is being said on these sites.
This is becoming such a concern that the board lawyer is considering whether or not cease and desist letters need to be used to take our school name off the group. Given how schools are routinely being held responsible for the behavior of children online outside of school it is becoming more likely that hey will be held responsible for the behavior of the adults as well.
Our concerns were two fold, first they used the schools name for their closed group and didn’t allow some parents in. They then proceeded to conduct official PTSA business through the closed group. That is not acceptable.
Second, parents in the closed group have tried to use comments made as “evidence” with regards to school decisions; I.e. disciplinary actions, class placements, etc. For example a student in my class took a quiz one day, handed it back 20 mins later, blank, and said he “forgot” there was a quiz. When I gave him the zero, his mother said he was not responsible because someone in the closed Facebook group had told her the quiz was postponed despite the quiz being announced in class, on the class website and on the class calendar. She tried to claim that this closed Facebook account, run completely autonomous from the school was an official source of information because parents used it to exchange info and that somehow the school is responsible for what is being said on these sites.
This is becoming such a concern that the board lawyer is considering whether or not cease and desist letters need to be used to take our school name off the group. Given how schools are routinely being held responsible for the behavior of children online outside of school it is becoming more likely that hey will be held responsible for the behavior of the adults as well.
Thank you for sharing.
The example of the "quiz being postponed" posted on the closed parent group was especially interesting.
The person who reported him wasn't a parent. What was SHE doing in the "private parents' group"?
Where did you read that she isn't a parent? The article says that she doesn't have a kid in any of the theater groups at the high school. How is that the same as saying she isn't a parent?
The problem with "closed groups", whether online or in person, is that the group often feeds off itself and doesn't take in all the information available.
Let me recreate a telephone conversation I once had as principal.
Parent: Mr. L, we have a little group that has been talking among ourselves, and we don't think you're a very open principal.
Principal: Oh, I'm sorry to hear that. Each month I am here at the school one evening when I have an open forum and any parent can come in and ask me questions. Have you or anyone in your group ever attended?
Parent: Well, no.
Principal: And at the monthly PTA meeting, a part of that is a question/answer session where I answer virtually any question, unless it's information that is legally confidential. All parents can attend the PTA meeting. Do any of you?
Parent: Well, no.
Principal: So how did you come to your conclusion.
Parent: Well, Mr. H, the principal over at the elementary school sent out a survey to all parents and then shared the results with a follow-up letter. You see how open he is?
Principal: Well, Mr. H didn't send out that survey. Each of us principals is evaluated that way every third year, and the survey is sent out to parents by the central office, as are the results. I was evaluated the same way this year. And our results will be published to the community 2 weeks from now.
Parent: Well you must have made sure that certain parents were not on the list, because none of us in our little group got a survey.
Principal: Well, that's because the school system's central office puts all the parent names and addresses into the computer, and it randomly sends surveys to 25% of the parents in the school.
Parent: [long silence]
Principal: But even though the results have not been mailed to the community, I have the results now. I'll be happy to give you the results. Are there any of the questions you would most like to compare between our results and Mr. H's results over at the elementary school.
So, she went through all the questions and the parent was stunned to see that our school and me as principal had better results in almost every question.
Principal: So, why don't you and your group come in and chat some time. We can even do it over lunch if you would like.
Parent: No, we wish to remain anonymous.
Principal: I can see why. Well, all of you in your little group, you just feel free to call anytime and ask whatever questions you would like. I'll answer any question that doesn't involve legally confidential information. And thank you for calling, Mrs. J----.
Parent: [long dead silence].
That's what's wrong with these closed and anonymous parent groups. Frankly, these little groups all to often get involved in character assassination.
You are judging all closed groups by this single one. I have been involved in many closed groups and have never seen anything like that example.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
