Your views on letter from School Governor
Discussion
bearman68 said:
If your FB comment is as written, you don't criticize anyone on there. You say that after a meeting with xxx you have received feedback to say your child is a delight, and not the horror previously reported.
Where is the defamatory comment there? Certainly not to xxx
Ask the governer to explain his reasoning.
My thoughts too. Have people been reading it as intended or skim reading it and picking up on the final sentence as being a criticism of the teacher praised in the first sentence?Where is the defamatory comment there? Certainly not to xxx
Ask the governer to explain his reasoning.
Or are they the same person? Seems unlikely but difficult to judge without having some background - which is perhaps best kept out of the public domain.
JustinP1 said:
I don't think either party has holy light shining on them in this.
However, consider if the letter was like this:
"Dear Facebooker,
I write on behalf of the governors of X school. It's been brought to my attention that you have posted on Facebook some comments about teaching at the school.
I would ask that any concerns you have about teaching are raised with the Headteacher, or, failing this, I am more than happy to hear your concerns.
I appreciate that this was not your intention, however, I hope you can also appreciate that your comments can be read of criticising a teacher in public. Not only does this undermine the school, it has caused distress to Mrs Miggins.
As such, I would like to ask that you could remove these comments from public viewing. I appreciate that you have concerns which is why I offer my telephone number and email address, where I am more than happy to discuss them with you.
Yours,
Sensible Governor.
Would this even be an issue now, if that were the letter?
This my opinion.However, consider if the letter was like this:
"Dear Facebooker,
I write on behalf of the governors of X school. It's been brought to my attention that you have posted on Facebook some comments about teaching at the school.
I would ask that any concerns you have about teaching are raised with the Headteacher, or, failing this, I am more than happy to hear your concerns.
I appreciate that this was not your intention, however, I hope you can also appreciate that your comments can be read of criticising a teacher in public. Not only does this undermine the school, it has caused distress to Mrs Miggins.
As such, I would like to ask that you could remove these comments from public viewing. I appreciate that you have concerns which is why I offer my telephone number and email address, where I am more than happy to discuss them with you.
Yours,
Sensible Governor.
Would this even be an issue now, if that were the letter?
In answer to other queries, facebook setting are private but she probably has too many 'friends'. She had previously communicated her opinion to the school. This was her only comment on facebook, she stands by it but has removed it to diffuse the situation (which we believe we have done).
My view is that it would have been better not posted, but I also question the appropriateness of the tone and the involvement of the Governor.
C Lee Farquar said:
This my opinion.
In answer to other queries, facebook setting are private but she probably has too many 'friends'. She had previously communicated her opinion to the school. This was her only comment on facebook, she stands by it but has removed it to diffuse the situation (which we believe we have done).
My view is that it would have been better not posted, but I also question the appropriateness of the tone and the involvement of the Governor.
As Ash has asked, what were the other comments your wife posted on Facebook referring to the teacher / school that the letter from the Governor refers to?In answer to other queries, facebook setting are private but she probably has too many 'friends'. She had previously communicated her opinion to the school. This was her only comment on facebook, she stands by it but has removed it to diffuse the situation (which we believe we have done).
My view is that it would have been better not posted, but I also question the appropriateness of the tone and the involvement of the Governor.
Of course, for all those who say that you should be cautious with Facebook, whils't I understand the sentiment, miss a major point.
If half a dozen other parents see it, and also note their child has responded well to a new teacher, having had poor performance under the previous one, then it could signify an issue with the teacher. And without open "discussion", how would they find out otherwise? A school could manage to continue being either unaware or covering up a poor teacher, by dealing with complaints on a one by one basis. When half a dozen all find out they're suffering the same, then something may be done.
If half a dozen other parents see it, and also note their child has responded well to a new teacher, having had poor performance under the previous one, then it could signify an issue with the teacher. And without open "discussion", how would they find out otherwise? A school could manage to continue being either unaware or covering up a poor teacher, by dealing with complaints on a one by one basis. When half a dozen all find out they're suffering the same, then something may be done.
dacouch said:
C Lee Farquar said:
This my opinion.
In answer to other queries, facebook setting are private but she probably has too many 'friends'. She had previously communicated her opinion to the school. This was her only comment on facebook, she stands by it but has removed it to diffuse the situation (which we believe we have done).
My view is that it would have been better not posted, but I also question the appropriateness of the tone and the involvement of the Governor.
As Ash has asked, what were the other comments your wife posted on Facebook referring to the teacher / school that the letter from the Governor refers to?In answer to other queries, facebook setting are private but she probably has too many 'friends'. She had previously communicated her opinion to the school. This was her only comment on facebook, she stands by it but has removed it to diffuse the situation (which we believe we have done).
My view is that it would have been better not posted, but I also question the appropriateness of the tone and the involvement of the Governor.
She was referring to two different teachers - she has made no other comment on facebook. She had raised an issue about the teacher on the section the parent can comment on a school report, which was returned to the Head but not shown to anyone else.
Jujuuk68 said:
Of course, for all those who say that you should be cautious with Facebook, whils't I understand the sentiment, miss a major point.
If half a dozen other parents see it, and also note their child has responded well to a new teacher, having had poor performance under the previous one, then it could signify an issue with the teacher. And without open "discussion", how would they find out otherwise? A school could manage to continue being either unaware or covering up a poor teacher, by dealing with complaints on a one by one basis. When half a dozen all find out they're suffering the same, then something may be done.
So parents are now suitably qualified to review teaching staff via Facebook. If half a dozen other parents see it, and also note their child has responded well to a new teacher, having had poor performance under the previous one, then it could signify an issue with the teacher. And without open "discussion", how would they find out otherwise? A school could manage to continue being either unaware or covering up a poor teacher, by dealing with complaints on a one by one basis. When half a dozen all find out they're suffering the same, then something may be done.
Pitchforks at the ready then.
If whoever wrote that letter is going to reference the 1997 Protection From Harassment Act , they could at least quote it, as the stuff written is not taken from it.
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1997/40/pdfs/u...
"(1) A person must not pursue a course of conduct—
(a)which amounts to harassment of another, and
(b)which he knows or ought to know amounts to harassment of the other.
(2)For the purposes of this section, the person whose course of conduct is in question ought to know that it amounts to harassment of another if a reasonable person in possession of the same information would think the course of conduct amounted to harassment of the other.
(3)Subsection (1) does not apply to a course of conduct if the person who pursued it shows—
(a)that it was pursued for the purpose of preventing or detecting crime,
(b)that it was pursued under any enactment or rule of law or to comply with any condition or requirement imposed by any person under any enactment, or
(c)that in the particular circumstances the pursuit of the course of conduct was reasonable."
and from later on in the act, in reference to the above:
"A “course of conduct” must involve conduct on at least two occasions".
None of which - in my opinion as a reasonable person - has been done. Furthermore, your post does not state that XXX is 'the teacher' referenced- you could be talking about a different person.
Note: IMNAL
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1997/40/pdfs/u...
"(1) A person must not pursue a course of conduct—
(a)which amounts to harassment of another, and
(b)which he knows or ought to know amounts to harassment of the other.
(2)For the purposes of this section, the person whose course of conduct is in question ought to know that it amounts to harassment of another if a reasonable person in possession of the same information would think the course of conduct amounted to harassment of the other.
(3)Subsection (1) does not apply to a course of conduct if the person who pursued it shows—
(a)that it was pursued for the purpose of preventing or detecting crime,
(b)that it was pursued under any enactment or rule of law or to comply with any condition or requirement imposed by any person under any enactment, or
(c)that in the particular circumstances the pursuit of the course of conduct was reasonable."
and from later on in the act, in reference to the above:
"A “course of conduct” must involve conduct on at least two occasions".
None of which - in my opinion as a reasonable person - has been done. Furthermore, your post does not state that XXX is 'the teacher' referenced- you could be talking about a different person.
Note: IMNAL
ORD said:
Gargantuan overreaction. How did we end up here? A world in which people are so vulnerable that even minor criticism leaves them in an hysterical tailspin?!
Because nowadays everyone is triggered by the slightest thing, and any concept of accountability or - God forbid - acceptance that one night not be a special snowflake deserving of special treatment or consideration, is unheard of. Everyone is special now, even children who might just not be as brilliant or irreproachable as one would believe.
supertouring said:
Jujuuk68 said:
Of course, for all those who say that you should be cautious with Facebook, whils't I understand the sentiment, miss a major point.
If half a dozen other parents see it, and also note their child has responded well to a new teacher, having had poor performance under the previous one, then it could signify an issue with the teacher. And without open "discussion", how would they find out otherwise? A school could manage to continue being either unaware or covering up a poor teacher, by dealing with complaints on a one by one basis. When half a dozen all find out they're suffering the same, then something may be done.
So parents are now suitably qualified to review teaching staff via Facebook. If half a dozen other parents see it, and also note their child has responded well to a new teacher, having had poor performance under the previous one, then it could signify an issue with the teacher. And without open "discussion", how would they find out otherwise? A school could manage to continue being either unaware or covering up a poor teacher, by dealing with complaints on a one by one basis. When half a dozen all find out they're suffering the same, then something may be done.
Pitchforks at the ready then.
As has been said, take up any grievance in person with the person in authority. Don't whinge and bleat in public hoping that others will join you in your pathetic lamentations.
So let's get this straight - the teacher who feels they were the subject of 'harassment' was never actually named on Facebook?
Now I would argue that it would be pretty hard to prove harassment (which I don't consider this is) if the 'victim' wasn't even identified. But then I am not a lawyer. So perhaps one might be along in a minute to put your mind at rest on that front.
I am, however, a governor at a school, and I can understand the issues that posts on Facebook can cause (been there, done that, worn out the T-shirt!).
Nevertheless I certainly think this has been handled incorrectly by the Chairman. Whilst they have a responsibility to protect the interests and the staff of the school, I don't think they should have written this letter - any communication should have come from the Head in the first instance. I reckon they have used the Chairman of the Governors as a bit of a bullying tactic as most people are not too knowledgeable on the role of governors and the authority they actually possess (which in all honesty, isn't an awful lot).
Getting a letter from the Chairman of the Governors (CoG) sounds much grander than it really is. From the tone of the letter it sounds like the CoG is a bit up their own arse and full of self importance.
Yes, teachers should be respected, but that that respect should be earned, not handed to them on a plate because they have managed to pass a qualification. Governors should be holding the school to account, and striving to improve the education of the pupils by demanding the highest standards from the staff. Teachers have a very difficult job, but they choose to do that job, and if they aren't up to the task then they should either shape up or ship out.
Well, reading that back it turned into far more of a rant than I intended! Somewhere in all that there was a point......now what was it?
Ah yes - OP, don't worry about the letter from the CoG, and maybe tell your other half to be more aware of what she posts on Facebook (or at least who can view it)
Now I would argue that it would be pretty hard to prove harassment (which I don't consider this is) if the 'victim' wasn't even identified. But then I am not a lawyer. So perhaps one might be along in a minute to put your mind at rest on that front.
I am, however, a governor at a school, and I can understand the issues that posts on Facebook can cause (been there, done that, worn out the T-shirt!).
Nevertheless I certainly think this has been handled incorrectly by the Chairman. Whilst they have a responsibility to protect the interests and the staff of the school, I don't think they should have written this letter - any communication should have come from the Head in the first instance. I reckon they have used the Chairman of the Governors as a bit of a bullying tactic as most people are not too knowledgeable on the role of governors and the authority they actually possess (which in all honesty, isn't an awful lot).
Getting a letter from the Chairman of the Governors (CoG) sounds much grander than it really is. From the tone of the letter it sounds like the CoG is a bit up their own arse and full of self importance.
castex said:
Teachers are qualified, carefully certified and ostensibly doing their best for the kids. They are in loco parentis and as such have to be given respect and the benefit of any doubt by pupils and parents alike in the absence of evidence.
All this is true, but it is also true that some teachers are lazy, vindictive, complacent, behind the times, not as qualified as they should be and just floating along until retirement. I've been a governor at a school that was placed in Special Measures by Ofsted - the standard of teaching was shocking. As a new, wet behind the ears untrained governor I didn't see what was going on, and it was only after the school was taken over by another Outstanding school that the difference was apparent.Yes, teachers should be respected, but that that respect should be earned, not handed to them on a plate because they have managed to pass a qualification. Governors should be holding the school to account, and striving to improve the education of the pupils by demanding the highest standards from the staff. Teachers have a very difficult job, but they choose to do that job, and if they aren't up to the task then they should either shape up or ship out.
Well, reading that back it turned into far more of a rant than I intended! Somewhere in all that there was a point......now what was it?
Ah yes - OP, don't worry about the letter from the CoG, and maybe tell your other half to be more aware of what she posts on Facebook (or at least who can view it)
Edited by Vroom101 on Friday 13th November 23:56
If the teacher was one of the few good ones then they would just laugh it off. The fact that they havent means you've most likely hit a raw nerve and put them into panic mode as they've been publicly outed as the poor teacher that they are.
Unfortunately nothing much you can do, teachers, heads and governors always close ranks and will back each other up. Consider yourself lucky that your child is now doing well with the new teacher, suck it up and move on. Sounds harsh but if you push this then its your child who will suffer in school not you.
Unfortunately nothing much you can do, teachers, heads and governors always close ranks and will back each other up. Consider yourself lucky that your child is now doing well with the new teacher, suck it up and move on. Sounds harsh but if you push this then its your child who will suffer in school not you.
Edited by Dodsy on Saturday 14th November 01:01
How is harrasmenr? Even if you mentioned a name.
It is no different from critisizing anyone else by name. Politicians, policemen, doctors, lawyers, judges e.t.c all get critisized everyday in newspapers and on the internet. That is not harrasment. It is an opinion and you are entitled to share it whether on facebook or on a box outside the school gates.
If you followed the said teacher about or posted on the teachers wall on facebook, then thats a different matter.
It is no different from critisizing anyone else by name. Politicians, policemen, doctors, lawyers, judges e.t.c all get critisized everyday in newspapers and on the internet. That is not harrasment. It is an opinion and you are entitled to share it whether on facebook or on a box outside the school gates.
If you followed the said teacher about or posted on the teachers wall on facebook, then thats a different matter.
I strongly suspect we're receiving an interpretation of the events, and a précis of the Facebook post (what further comments were there, for example?).
However, on the facts given, if they are true and complete, then the governor's letter is so ridiculous that it would get a reply from me similar to the reply given in the case of Arkell v. Pressdram (1971).
However, on the facts given, if they are true and complete, then the governor's letter is so ridiculous that it would get a reply from me similar to the reply given in the case of Arkell v. Pressdram (1971).
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff