April 11 roundup


  • First link: Un-freaking-believable.

  • Why, Patrick? It’s merely another example of the Good Ole (modern) American Way of dispute resolution:
    1. My lawyer can whip your lawyer;
    and, if not,
    2. Since the Union pays my lawyer and you have to pay yours, My lawyer can bankrupt you while who try to defend your rights.

    You seem to think that schools are about education. Wrong. Schools are about teaching kids about life. The kid is getting a pretty accurate lesson.

  • I wonder if the teacher and union have opened themselves to an anti-SLAPP suit? That would be a learning experience…

  • I have to think that the teacher’s and union’s response is unfortunately a necessary course of action.
    The student has unfettered ability to comment upon the teacher and to do so with lies, or false light comments, but the teacher is strictly bound by laws preventing any specific public rebuttal of the student’s very public accusations. At some point it becomes worth the Streisand effect risk to tell one’s detractor to put up or shut up.

  • The Scott Greenfield link on bonuses for police arrests was mistakenly omitted when this went up. I’ve put it in now. Sorry!

  • “Insulting Your Boss Online Is Now Protected Speech”

    …but don’t be surprised if you don’t get that promotion.

  • I have to think that the teacher’s and union’s response is unfortunately a necessary course of action.

    No Gasman, it is not a necessary course of action. The student was not accusing the teacher of assault, just being graded unfairly. It is no big deal. It happens countless times every school year. Also, why do automatically believe that the student is lying? But even if she is misrepresenting the facts, the teacher is able to present his side of the story to the school. That is as far as it should go. We don’t need lawyers getting involved every time there is a disagreement between a student and a teacher.

  • “Also, why do [sic] automatically believe that the student is lying?”

    Read the text Richard. “The student has unfettered ability to comment …” that is, there is an imbalance in the public forum discussion, into which there is the potential for her to introduce untruths or false light, that the teacher would not be permitted to answer, but in private before the board. The teacher can get smeared in public, the student gets a free hand until a much bigger stick is waived.

  • Bull, right or wrong, this young lady has a beef about her grade that her teacher refused to discuss. She did not whine about it on FB or tweeter. She did not complain anonymously. She followed the chain to the school board. Her teacher is trying to shut her up, which tacitly is saying there is something to her beef. The teacher calls her a “little girl”, in an attempt to minimize her importance and disparage her. He then goes over the top in accusing her of “dragging her his name through the mud.” (seems like man who is unable to admit his mistakes). As a cherry on top of his self made sundae, he claims she is destroying his reputation with “false” accusations. (But, how can we know they are false if he won’t discuss them?) The letter from the lawyers was equally outrageous. Threatening her with legal action if she does not stop her “false and defamatory aspersions”. And then sticking out their collective tongue at her by saying “the grade you received from Mr. Covington will not be changed.” and BTW, if you look in the comments, they young lady in question is there as is at least one eyewitness to the school board meetings in which the teacher was overheard disparaging the student.