- This topic has 120 replies, 40 voices, and was last updated 12 years ago by .
-
Posts
-
zahavasdad: Hey, I’m a teenage girl…my opinion counts…
MP (and everyone else): I agree with you that the hypocrisy is not okay. But speaking in general – I don’t think schools should ban Facebook, but that they definitely can. I do think that a school has a right to expect a certain level of behavior from their students, even out of school. Saying that whatever happens out of your school is not your domain is not responsible chinuch. Although I do think the parents should be in charge of *enforcing* the rules out of school. (Of course, this presupposes that the school and the parents are on the same page…)
Too,Loyal Jew
Why was it OK to join FB for money?
You’re trying to mix two issues here: whether what this school is doing is wrong, or whether schools can ban Facebook b’chlal. The fact that this school not doing it properly doesn’t make banning Facebook unilaterally bad. I will not comment on the school and their politics.
OneOfMany, I see what you are saying. But I actually think it should be the exact opposite. I think the PARENTS are the most responsible for their children’s chinuch, and the schools should try to “enforce” the rules when they’re in school. I can’t stand it when parents do nothing to give their children a love and appreciation for Judaism and its laws and customs, and leave it up the school to do it. The schools’ job, in my opinion, is to be a school. Not to be a parent. I may be biased because my mom is in an authoritative position at a school, and I see how some parents give NOTHING to their children at home and hope the school does it all for them. And those kids are usually the ones who don’t have a love for Judaism, don’t have complete faith in G-d, etc., because it is not the teacher’s job to give all that. The teacher is there to teach. Everything else should come from the home, and because of this, I don’t think schools should have authority over children when they are not at school. At those times, the parents are in charge, and the kids should not be controlled by school rules.
MP – “For example, saying “Facebook is bad, the Internet is evil, etc..” That is just foolish. Everything can be used in a good or bad way. It is US who make that choice.”
I agree with this line, even though the town I live in disagrees with this statement.
As far as teenagers are concerned -I feel they should not be allowed on FB and it should be enforced by the school. It’s too easy for a teen to end up doing the wrong thing on FB -they aren’t mature enough to know how not to fall into any traps.
I think we everyone should face the basic details, people cant control people if people have facebook then obvoiusly they felt it was ok! Do people really think they can change opiones that easily?
MiddlePath:
“As I said earlier, schools should not have control over what their students do out of school. I don’t mind if schools block Facebook on their own computers in the computer lab. But it should not be in the school’s power to control what their students do OUT of school.”
Why not? A Frum school should be instructing its students how to lead a Torah-true life, not just how to behave in school. If the school believes that Facebook can be harmful to its students Yiddishkeit, it can and should ban it.
“That is what PARENTS are for. Too often, parents will point fingers at the schools for things that they themselves should be responsible for.”
True, parents should show their children how to lead a Toarh-true life. However, the fact that parents do not always do that should be a reason for the school to be more, not less involved in their students lives.
“Also, I don’t like when people throw blame at objects instead of taking the blame themselves. For example, saying “Facebook is bad, the Internet is evil, etc..” That is just foolish. Everything can be used in a good or bad way. It is US who make that choice. If someone uses Facebook in a bad way, it’s not because Facebook is bad. It’s because the PERSON made the CHOICE to use it in a bad way. The PERSON is to blame, not the OBJECT.”
I don’t think anybody is claiming that Facebook is inherently evil, only that it enables people (usually teenagers) to do certain things that could be highly detrimental to their Yiddishkeit. And since Facebook gives people access to much more negative things than positive things, I don’t think it’s such a bad idea for a Frum school to ban it.
Middlepath: I have to disagree. Yes, the parents are ultimately responsible for their children’s chinuch – but once the kids are enrolled in a school, the parents and the school need to work as a team. Saying this is my domain and that is their domain ties both parties’ hands. Parents should definitely not be completely reliant on the school to raise their kids, but a school does a lot, lot more than just teach stuff, and it’s dangerous to try to downplay the role they really do have.
Look at it this way – let’s say the parents really don’t want their kid on Facebook or whatever. If the school they choose doesn’t have rules to that effect, there will be those there who do have it, and the kids in question will probably get into it too. Of course, the opposite works as well – if the school doesn’t allow it and the parents do, you also end up at odds. The point is that there’s no way to have a defined set of standards if the two major forces in a child’s chinuch are cutting each other short. And defined standards are essential.
Agav – if you think about it, there are schools much more mainstream than Bais Rivka that have no ban on Facebook. That makes me suspect that the move may have been necessary for some reason or another. I still don’t know or want to know what the situation is, but I think there’s a lot of room to be dan l’kaf zchus.
Um, specifically which schools more mainstream than Beis Rivka allow Facebook?
(Don’t mistake no written ban as an allowance. Many schools implicitly understand that it is a no-no without even having to say so. Just as they don’t have a policy against bringing a gun to school, but it is self-understood by everyone.)
…the one I went to?
You’re wrong about bans and allowances. I don’t know if it really bothered the hanhala or not, but they definitely knew girls were on it and didn’t take any punitive measures. If someone brought a gun to school (or wore pants or broke any other “unspoken” rule), they would have. If you don’t have a rule and don’t enforce it, you can’t pretend that people are breaking it. Plus, you can make such assumptions about matters that are illegal/unequivocally assur, but not really with matters that are more than black-and-white.
Besides, my school quite sufficiently specific and thorough when it came to bans, so there was no need to read anything else into their policy.
Also, I didn’t make the point in order to cast their decision in a bad light. I was merely pointing out that it’s unlikely that they did it just for kicks. So calm down and stop trying to attack things out of context.
When the girls who are in Beis Rivka decided they were going there, they accepted the no Fb rule. It was their choice. Also ofcourse a school has to care what their students do outside of school that wouldn’t be proper chinuch each student is suppose to repersent their school and thats that.
As of the fact that the school first told the girls to go on FB to raise money for them that is completely hypocritical.
Health, thanks for agreeing.
The Kanoi, I completely understand you. I just think that it’s really not the school’s job to be “parents” of the students who unfortunately aren’t well-parented at home.
OneOfMany, fair enough. I see your viewpoint, and we will just have to disagree. I do agree that schools play an extremely important role in the growth of children. I just think the areas pertaining to living life as a Jew, and instilling a value system, are best left to the parents. That is their turf. A school’s job, foremost, is not that. It is education. Sure, the two overlap in many areas, and it is very important that the parents and schools are on the same page to help the children come out with a solid upbringing. I just think it’s dangerous for schools to get more involved than they should, the same way you feel (and rightly so) that it is dangerous to downplay the role they have.
lol MiddlePath, I think that was the most amicable disagreement I’ve had in the CR.
Haha! OneOfMany, I agree with that! 🙂
Middlepath: I have a problem with your line of reasoning. If I were to follow your logic then I would presume there would be no difference in attending a private school to a public school.
The reason why jewish parents send their children to a specific school is because it has a certain atmosphere and a slant in the chinuch that the parents (should) agree to.
That is not to say that every school is for everybody. But the duty of a private school is to maintain the atmosphere and level of seclusion the parents expect.
I would think that it was a big mistake to encourage the students to sign on to facebook in the first place. DUMB DECISION.
Big deal- of course it was a dumb decision!!! When the girls hear the school reasoning… “Well it is ok for money, we need it”….. Then they will start to think it is good to rationilize, “well i meed to keep up with friends and FB is the easiest way…..”all down hill from there!
big deal, that is exactly my line of reasoning. Perhaps the reason I have a very different opinion than most of you here about this is because I genuinely prefer the way small “out of town” communities run. There is one (maybe two) Jewish day schools that everyone sends their children to where they are educated, and the vast majority of instilling an appreciation for Judaism comes from the home. The way it works is that the school is there to educate, and NOT to give specific hashkafos or particular values associated with a certain sect of Judaism, because the students are from all different types.
I think the reason most of you would are disagreeing with me is because I would presume most of you are from the large Jewish communities in New York, where there are many, many schools to choose from, and parents must pick the school they feel is closest to their “hashkafos” in order for their children to thrive, because sending them to another school would destroy their child’s value system, since it would be directly opposed to what they are taught at home, because the school IS instilling a specific value system that is particular to a certain sect.
The question here is not why we send our children to certain schools. The idea here is to provide what the parents expect when they pay for these private schools.
Your other comments have value and would provide interesting discussion in another thread.
Actually, those two questions you mentioned are very closely related. The reason parents send their children to specific schools is because they expect that school to provide whatever they expect them to provide for the price they are paying. And in the larger Jewish communities where there are more schools, that would include expecting the school to instill into the children the same hashkafos that the parents are instilling. In the small communites where there may be one school, that would include expecting the school to give a solid education fit for all types of Jews.
I grew up oot…I live in NY now, though.
zahavasdad: No, not true at all. My elementary school banned Facebook and didn’t care about the internet in general.
I’m not saying that that was a good policy of theirs (it DEFINITELY wasn’t) but many schools don’t think that way.
I’m not entirely sure about banning stuff like that myself, just because as Bais Rivka obviously knows, Facebook can be useful and necessary at times. My mom has Facebook for work. I can’t understand all those schools who don’t let internet at all, even filtered, and take pride in it, because the world is changing and they can’t just ignore it. A better way to control it, in my opinion, is to teach how to use it, supply a filter, etc.
Maybe they could find a filter company to cooperate with the school and mandate the filter for homes but at a reduced rate. I don’t think that’s practical, but its more practical than the situation now.
The HS my daughter attended (which was pre-FB) has a no FB policy. So what do the girls do instead? Simple, create accounts using fake names. This is just one of those issues where the kids are more tech savvy then the administration. And not everyone is using FB in an untznious manner. Years ago they all used AOL Instant Messenger – this is basically the same thing with pictures (if the user choses to post them). Wonder if they’ll deal with this issue at Citifield? You can’t just ban things without knowledge of what the girls are really doing online. I can see someone monitoring their usage for anything inappropriate as a far more practical alternative.
Also, going back to the “hypocrisy” bit (where some questioned how the school could encourage their students to sign up for Facebook to enter a contest, then ban it):
Couldn’t it be that the hanhala of the school simply did not realize at the beginning exactly what Facebook is? Perhaps they didn’t realize how much objectionable material can be accessed via Facebook, and once they realized their mistake they reversed their policy.
Hevai dun es kol ha’adam li’kaf zchus.
MiddlePath: Ok. So should a school ban facebook? Yes. If its a private school and that’s what the parents paying for it are expecting.
As a side note. I do believe that a school should ban facebook and the private use of the internet by kids. It has nothing to do with being Jewish. I believe in keeping a child’s innocence as long as possible. Why are taking these little angels and making them grow up way before their time? Putting them in charge of their own safety when they haven’t yet reached the age of 10. Are we shirking our responsibilities.
Yes. I know its something they want. They also want a million dollars to be able to get the latest brand name clothing, latest video game console and so much more. Are we as parents losing the ability to say NO.? What exactly will happen if children get full exposure to the realities of the world when they are a little older? Anyone going to lose out if they get acquainted with the internet/facebook when they are out of high school? (never figured out the importance of facebook anyway. It might be a toy but definitely not a necessity.)
This whole conversation doesn’t just stop at FB
big deal, what do you mean when you say a school should ban Facebook? That they should block it on their own computers in the lab, or they should have the authority to not allow students to have access to Facebook even at home? Clearly, there are schools that do it the second way. And if the parents, and students, know of this rule when they enroll, I don’t see too much of a problem with it (aside from my belief that schools shouldn’t have control over things that go on outside of school). But hey, if the parents are okay with it, good for them.
Regarding your opinion that we must leave children their “innocence” as long as possible: While that’s a nice idea in theory, the bottom line is that they will probably discover the internet and social networking before we wish to “unveil” it to them anyway at an age we feel appropriate. And if we don’t inform them of these things first, and show them how to use it properly, they’ll probably learn about it from the wrong sources, and probably not have too much of an idea of how to use it properly. Too early is much better than too late.
And I’m not sure what you mean about “If they get full exposure to the realities of the world”. They most probably WILL be exposed to the realities of the world. And to fill you in a little, using the internet is considered a necessity to most professional jobs today. Facebook can be a valuable tool for networking, reaching clients, and spreading your product. I use it for a few different things, including school and spreading my work around, and it has helped me greatly.
My feeling is not to allow FB for children at home. If they allow it in school in the lab in school or something – I have to think about it.
Thanks for filling me in. I mean seriously, I know the internet is a very important tool for business and so forth. I never said to ban it completely. I just don’t see why we need to expose our children to it so much.
Let me ask you a couple of questions here. What’s your opinion about say, a twelve year old girl having an affair? Or how about a 15 year old giving birth? What about giving a 13 year old boy the keys to a car?
Please don’t answer its against the torah or such. Do you think its ok or not and why. There’s a reason for my asking this its part of the discussion.
big deal, I understand where you are coming from. I actually do not feel the need to expose our children to the internet so much. I just think that they WILL get exposed to it at some point, and when that happens, w’d better hope it is from the right sources, and parents would be a right source (hopefully).
Hmm, interesting questions. I’d say that chances are, a child of 12 or 15 would probably not have the maturity or responsibility required to handle taking care of a baby or being committed to and being in a genuine relationship. But it is definitely possible for them to have that maturity if they are educated in it, are committed to it, and know what it takes to be in it. The same thing would apply to a 13 year old driving. The reason there are age restrictions on things like this is for the majority, because the majority of children may not have what it takes to be a responsible driver until the age of 16 or 18 or whatever it might be. I actually think many youngsters that drive shouldn’t be allowed to because they are very erratic.
Bottom line, if they have the maturity necessary (and granted, such maturity is becoming increasingly difficult to find, because of our society coupled with a lack of good parenting), then I see nothing wrong with it.
I know this is off topic, but:
I agree with MP about the role of school vs. parents, but not (I think) for the same reason.
“Hashkafos” in this sense – how to approach the world, yidishkeit, etc – can’t and shouldn’t be taught in a school setting. They need to be taught as gray areas, with the understanding that they heavily depend on the individual, and continue to change as he does – and therefore is suitable for the parent/child dynamic.
Logician:
Your position is dangerous. Let me explain.
Chinuch is a partnership between yeshivos and parents. And everything needs to be taught everywhere. The failure of that arrangement is the failure to raise a child to follow in the derech of Torah and Mitzvos. Homework, for example, is NOT to accomplish the teaching of the academic subjects outside of the classroom, but to extend the school work into the home environment – to bridge the two. Likewise, the reason to choose schools with hashkafos similar to the families of origin is to leave less room for disparity. These relationships create stability that is crucial for successful growth. The wedges between home and school are disastrous and damaging.
There will always be minor differences, and these can be used to add color to the picture, but not stark opposites.
Each and every moment in a child’s life is a potential teaching moment, and it needs to be exploited as such. Whether we are addressing use of internet, technology in general, whether we discuss and implement acts of chesed, whether midos,, whether tefillah or learning Torah – the payoff of proper use is great. maybe that is what is intended in Pirkei Avos – ????? ??? ????? ??? ???, which obligates us as learners. It must be a ?? ????? for us as teachers.
MiddlePath: Exactly.
“I’d say that chances are, a child of 12 or 15 would probably not have the maturity or responsibility required to handle taking care of a baby or being committed to and being in a genuine relationship”
That’s exactly the point. Just because internet and FB can be used for good non harmful things it doesn’t mean that people of all ages have the maturity, moral convictions and personal safety knowledege to know how to use it. I don’t believe it should start at a young age. We could break into it slowly with the right guidance.
You say that if we ban facebook and internet, some kids will find other means of access. True. But those we can protect we should. I also don’t know if the right word is ban or something else. The word ban almost means nothing today. We need to teach appreciation.
zdad- you say that tools should be taught. like how to use facebook. youd agree that teaching a child to use heroin is dumb? well, maybe facebook, ruchnius-wise, is also dangerous. some tools arent supposed to be within the reach of children. youre not helping a kid by giving a bit, because kids are smarter than that; you give finger and theyll take a hand. i agree with big deal. and i think your priorities and values need reorganizing.
Logician, thanks for agreeing, and I agree with your reason as well.
The little I know, it seems you are describing some schools in the larger Jewish communities that cater to specific types of Jews. While I may not agree with how they are run, I can understand why, for schools like those, where they DO instill a specific type of hashkafah, it is important for the parents and school to work together and definitely be on the same page. Because if they aren’t, and if they aren’t working together, then chances are the child will receive one type of hashkafah at home and another at school, and that can be dangerous, as you said. What I (and I think Logician) are saying is that if the school is “neutral” in terms of specific hashkafos, and the children are simply going there to be educated, and their own hashkafos come almost entirely from the home, there is no danger in that.
big deal, true, it is possible that children do not have the maturity to use these things responsibly. And if they aren’t mature enough, I agree that it would not be beneficial to inform them of how to use it. At the same time, parents should be extremely aware of the maturity of their children, and understand when they ARE mature enough for these things. Because these things are best absorbed when taught by parents, or at least a figure that the child respects. Because if not, they will probably learn of it from other, less desirable sources, and chances they won’t be mature and responsible enough to know how to use it properly then. There is no set age where such a thing should be taught. Every child is different, and the parents should understand that. I agree that banning means nothing, and usually backfires almost every time. We definitely need to teach appreciation, encourage responsibility, and show trust.
Toi, I actually agree with you that Facebook is almost always unnecessary for children, and there isn’t really a reason they should have it (there may be a special circumstance, but generally, it’s not necessary for them). But for things that would be beneficial to them , I agree with zahavasdad that teaching correct usage is far, far better than banning.
Heard in shul this morning:
???? ????? ?? ????? ??? ??? ???? ???. The second half of the posuk is clearly a requisite of how to perform this mitzvah. There are two major patterns for rebuke. First is the pronouncing the offender as a ??? ?????, which includes all those features of how to deal with a violator, labeling, consequences, etc. The second is using the incident as a teaching opportunity, to show the person what the transgression was and how to protect from repeating the ?????. Considering these two directions, it seems the Torah is commanding us to fulfill the mitzvah of ????? without the focus on the ???, but rather on the education moment. This is revealing about how we set rules and consequences.
I probably should just keep quiet and let things be. There’s still so much more to be said on the subject.
Middlepath: The same is with everything in life. It is the duty of the parent to keep open communication an conversation running throughout their childrens’ lives. This helps them gauge the maturity level and emotional support the child might have/need. I just don’t think its so necessary to be on the lookout to be ready to jump the second the kid might have enough maturity to handle the internet/facebook.
In the age where government or liberal minded people have taken control over our rights as parents to decide on the best method of raising children, is it too complex of an idea to want to create an environment where facebook is not encouraged to protect our children from the inherent dangers of the internet?
They tell us to put our babies on their backs to sleep to prevent sids.
Our kids must wear helmets when they ride their bikes even in their own backyard…
We should dare to even dream of hitting our children for fear of being charged with child abuse.
Never talk negatively to a kid – you might hurt their self esteem…
(I know I’ll get smashed for the above.)
But they would never discourage internet/facebook use for fear of going against their “progressive” ideas. How many terrible things have happened through neglectful use of these tools. How many suicides, homocides, assaults, bullying, stalking… you name it… are reported on a daily basis. (forget about the ones never reported.)
You ready to put that whole responsibility on the shoulders of a young kid – or even a teenager? Even with proper training and knowledge,kids fall into all kinds of traps. So do adults by the way (ex: identity theft).
Adults need tools to advance in life and they need to have access to the world beyond their home. I think its time to send our kids back to the ball field.
Little – I did not advocate putting your kid in a school where he will get very different ideas than your home. There should be a mix, though, and its hard to know where to draw the line.
My point was that haskafos in school usually come across black and white. The main chinuch is to understand the gray areas, and how to work in them individually.
big deal, I completely understand your viewpoint, and it is a valid method of parenting. Different styles work for different people. Some would prefer not risking their child’s innocence for them to be more open to the world, and others would prefer showing them how to deal with the world and possibly letting them learn from their experiences, and even mistakes. You are right, there is much to said on this topic, and I think lots of good things were already said. Thank you for this discussion, and thanks to OneOfMany as well.
middle path- you only let them learn from mistakes because the possible issurim clearly arent so chamur by you. no sane parent would let their child learn from there mistakes concerning drugs or being involved in something against the law, maskim? well, if your childs’ spirituality is as importnant, how can you think to allow them to mess up and learn? the same way you wont let them learn from being in rehab. and if you dont like the tzushtel then you should reconsider the holiness of a childs neshama.
Toi – and yet you would agree that we learn from our mistakes, and that process does have to happen (I assume).
So when, and/or in what areas, would that apply ?
Toi, good deduction. While letting children do whatever they want and hope they learn from their mistakes is clearly NOT what I had in mind, nor do I think is it a good thing to do, I do think that allowing them to make their own choices, in moderation, and letting them make mistakes (that wouldn’t scar them in any major way, obviously) is a good way for them to learn about life lessons, and the world. Someone who has made a mistake, learned from it, and corrected it, is generally, in my opinion, better off than someone who has never made the mistake at all. This is because the person who has never made the mistake may not fully understand the parameters involved in whatever choice it may entail, and therefore, when the person is bombarded with the choice in the future, he may not know how to correctly deal with it. Someone who has familiarity with the possible effects of the choice will be able to discern the best possible choice because of past experiences.
mp- so vaguely youre saying that your kid being marginally affected detrimentally by facebook is acceptable, if he learns from his mistakes. just clarifying. I would guard my childs neshama with all ive got, and therefore wouldnt allow them near facebook. the same way i wouldnt let them near cocaine.
logician-learning from mistakes is the silver lining of making them.
we do not put ourselves in situations where we expect to fall and learn. we try our best and if we still fall, we endeavor to learn from those failings, to see where we went wrong and not repeat it. allowing a kid on dangerous sites on purpose doesnt qualify.
wow…yes facebook is a horrible thing for society i makes us believe that we can “be friends” with people without seeing them.
that defeats the whole idea of being there for others,literally
so many kids have gone “off” BECAUSE of facebook for various reasons
my old school had people come talk to us about the dangers of facebook and they are right:
“IF YOU HAVE A PROBLEM FACE IT DONT FACEBOOK IT”
Toi, wonderful. So we would have different parenting styles. Actually, as I said a few posts up, I don’t think that children need Facebook at all, so I wouldn’t purposely have them create accounts and hope they learn from their mistakes, because that is irresponsible. If my wife and I would decide that our child is old enough to understand the possible pitfalls of having it, and would be able to learn from them, and is at the stage where having it may be beneficial, then we’d probably allow it. Now, I’d like to ask you a question. I understand your method perfectly, that you do not wish to to have your child negatively affected at all and therefore will keep him away from it entirely. Would you employ that method in all areas of your child’s life? Such as your child’s physical well-being, emotional, etc.? Would you not allow your child to learn how to ride a bike because he may fall and cut his knee? A child learns how to properly ride a bike by trying it out, falling a few times, hurting himself a few times, and after a while, he learns from his mistakes and is able to do it. And I think the same concept is true for everything in life.
Toi – as I wrote earlier, I was writing on a side point. I def. agree about FB.
But – “im lo nufalti, lo kamti. im lo ha’ya choshech, lo ha’ya ohr li”. more or less. meaning they must happen, not just a silver lining. So yes, you don’t try to fall, but as you’re aware of the fact that you will, you prepare differently.
mp- i believe that spiritua sakanos are to be avoided more carefully than a child scraping a knee. that wil heal. if my kids wearing a helmet etc., he’ll be ok. but allowing children access to things that their yetzer hara is excited for is like putting a ten year old on a motorcycle without a helmet. the potential for long-lasting damage is greater; the possible outcome infinitely worse.
logician- even if they must happen, their din to happen is as a totza’ah of trying to do right and messing up. in essence they are an inevitable silver lining. they may be needed, the may happen no matter what, but its our job to try to avoid them and deal with them when we must. not embrace them.
Toi, I understand your view. I just think that spiritual ups and downs are just as much part of life as physical and emotional, and therefore, shouldn’t be treated differently. You say it’s like putting a 10 year old on a motorcycle without a helmet. I think THAT would be comparable to letting a 10 year old, who has very little maturity and responsibility, have a Facebook account. Which I would also be against. What I am referring to is, say, a 16 year old, who has maturity and responsibility, and let’s say has a talent in music, letting him have a Facebook account so he can post his music for people to hear. Yes, he may have some lapses in judgement, but I think at that stage in his life, with the right parenting, he’d be able to learn from those mistakes and turn out a more well-rounded person.
Toi – not embrace, but prepare. To teach them about the process of dealing with adverse situations, not only instructing them as to the most favorable situation to strive for.
This doesn’t have to mean exposing them, although avoiding extremes might be nice. I mean educating about the nature of life and the problems it brings.
I think you guys are just pitting two valid educational philosophies against each other. Just, y’know, different strokes for different folks.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.