Apparently, Dallas ISD teachers received a notice yesterday, which they are required to acknowledge receipt of, essentially advising them that their First Amendment rights do not apply whenever their online discussion involves DISD. They are not to post blog items or converse online, either via DISD accounts or personal accounts, in any way that disparages the district. In other words, you can sing the praises of the district and its new administration. But you may not criticize it. In fact, you may not even discuss district business. Period.
The district reserves the right to block teachers from viewing the very words I?m writing now if some officials decide that what I?m writing is detrimental to DISD.
Nothing I can find in this directive excuses the Board of Trustees from the policy, so Carla Ranger might want to rethink some of her blog items. And by the way, speaking the truth doesn?t appear to be a defense in this policy.
This comes fresh on the heels of the administration?s previous ?happy talk? initiative?this month when it asked principals to recruit teachers to write glowing letters about the revolutionary changes now being instituted. That initiative included suggested wording that principals could put into the mouths of the teachers, even though the administration acknowledges openly that DISD teachers right now are not exactly at a high point in terms of morale.
The fact is, teachers are grumbling loudly about the way they?re being treated. And they are speaking out in emails and on blogs, including this one. The volume of their complaints apparently doesn?t sit well with the administration. Rather than listen and learn from the complaints and, perhaps, consider a more productive change in course, the administration instead wants them just to shut up. And so, yesterday, it sent out the following orders:
?a. Limited and occasional use of the District?s systems to engage in blogging is acceptable if authorized, provided that it is done in a professional and responsible manner, does not otherwise violate the District?s policy, is not detrimental to the District?s best interests, and does not interfere with an employee?s regular work duties.??The District reserves the right to block access to these or other Web sites.
?b. Blogging by employees, whether using the District?s property and systems or personal computer systems, is also subject to the terms and restrictions set forth in this regulation.??Blogging from the District?s systems is also subject to monitoring.
?c. Users are also prohibited from discussing specific District business within any personal home pages they may have established on these sites outside of District business hours.
?d. The District?s Data Classification and Retention Regulation also applies to blogging.??As such, employees are prohibited from revealing any District confidential or proprietary information, trade secrets, or any other material covered by the District?s Data Classification and Retention Regulation when engaged in blogging.
?e. Employees will not engage in any blogging that may harm or tarnish the image, reputation, and/or goodwill of the District and/or any of its employees.??Employees are also prohibited from making any discriminatory, disparaging, defamatory, or harassing comments when blogging or otherwise engaging in any conduct prohibited by the District?s Nondiscrimination and Anti-Harassment policy.
?f. Employees may also not attribute personal statements, opinions, or beliefs to the District when engaged in blogging.??If an employee is expressing his or her beliefs and/or opinions in blogs, the employee may not, expressly or implicitly, represent him or herself as an employee or representative of the District.??Employees assume any and all risk associated with blogging.
?Apart from following all laws pertaining to the handling and disclosure of copyrighted or export-controlled materials, the District?s trademarks, logos, and any other District intellectual property may also not be used in connection with any blogging.?
I would divulge the source of this information, but doing so might put the DISD employee at risk of punishment under paragraph ?e? because the mere fact that the district has issued this sweeping directive absolutely tarnishes and disparages the image of the officials who came up with it.
matt forte jeremy shockey new orleans saints ireland bracket vangogh yield
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.