Scribd
Upload
817 views2 pages

SAMPLE EthicalCase2

Tony posted accusations against his professor on social media, using profane language. When confronted, Tony argued the posts were private and a way to vent frustrations. Schools have a dual responsibility to students' learning and development into responsible citizens. While student speech rights extend to social media, schools can discipline for online conduct that disrupts school, violates others' rights, damages the school's reputation, or goes against its standards. Tony's actions were irresponsible but the school's obligation is to correct his behavior through counseling rather than punishment, and guide him to address issues professionally rather than through online attacks. Schools' disciplinary authority can extend to students' online conduct.

Uploaded by

Kyla Joanna Sabareza Tomagan
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
817 views2 pages

SAMPLE EthicalCase2

Tony posted accusations against his professor on social media, using profane language. When confronted, Tony argued the posts were private and a way to vent frustrations. Schools have a dual responsibility to students' learning and development into responsible citizens. While student speech rights extend to social media, schools can discipline for online conduct that disrupts school, violates others' rights, damages the school's reputation, or goes against its standards. Tony's actions were irresponsible but the school's obligation is to correct his behavior through counseling rather than punishment, and guide him to address issues professionally rather than through online attacks. Schools' disciplinary authority can extend to students' online conduct.

Uploaded by

Kyla Joanna Sabareza Tomagan
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 2

Use of Social Media

Tony, a second year college student, was reported by his classmate to their professor. According
to the classmate, Tony uploaded several posts in his social media account accusing his professor
of unfair treatment of his students. Through these posts, he detailed how his professor did not
allow him to take up a quiz he missed while allowing others to have make-up quizzes in the past.
In the posts, Tony used profane words against the professor and questioned the latter’s
effectiveness as a teacher. When summoned by the discipline officer about it, Tony argued that
the posts were only made out of anger and were only intended to be seen by his social media
followers as his account is not set in public. Moreover, he explained that his posts are his way to
vent out his frustrations and weariness that he cannot share with his family.

As a student and as a social media user, what can you say about the actions taken by Tony? Do
schools have the moral obligation to correct how their students behave in their social media
accounts? Should the school penalize Tony for lashing out on his professor online given his
circumstance? Defend your moral stand.

A loose tongue is worse than wicked hands. But social media often allows for a fusion of a loose
tongue and wicked hands. Controversial issues, such as the alleged unfair treatment of a professor,
are supposed to be addressed with due process and in the proper forum. Tony’s irresponsible use
of social media to lambast his professor’s actions violate the principles of truth telling and honesty
and of non-maleficence. His profane words and accusations were not only damaging of the
professor’s dignity but it also presents a case of inaccuracy since the complete facts and full
context were absent. Tony has misused his freedom of expression for freedom is not freedom
without knowing its limits.
These days, most students no longer need to assemble in the streets to express their views and
be heard, they just simply need to post and tweet. A student’s facebook wall should not look like
a virtual bathroom wall where one airs out his frustrations and gossips. This brings us to the
question, do school’s disciplinary authority extend ot cyberspace? In the case of Jose Angeles vs
Sison, the court recognized that schools have a dual responsibility to their students. One is to
provide opportunities for learning and the other is to help them grow and develop into mature,
responsible, and ideal citizens of the country. Discipline is the means to carry out the second
responsibility.

The general rule is that the authority of the school is co-extensive within its school grounds so that
any action taken for acts committed outside the school premises should be left to the police
authorities, the courts of justice, and to the family concerned. But this rule is not rigid. There are
instances where schools might be called upon to exercise its power over students for acts
committed outside the school and beyond school hours when there are violations of school
policies or regulations occurring or elating to a school sponsored activity off campus or in cases
where the misconduct of the student involves his status as a student or affects the good name or
reputation of the school. For example, the case of Vivares vs. St. Theresa’s College, this principle
recognizing the authority of the school to discipline students for off campus conduct has been
further extended to students’ conduct on facebook. Students, like all citizens, continue to enjoy
their freedom of expression. This protected speech and expression extends to their posts and
conduct in social media and cyberspace. However, schools may impose disciplinary action against
students, even teachers if after due process and investigation, it can be shown that their conduct
in cyberspace 1) disrupts activity in the school or substantially interferes with school policies; 2)
impinges on the rights of other; 3) damages the schools reputation ; and 5) goes against school
standards of morality, propriety, and decency. While students do not shed their constitutional
rights when they enter schoolgates, these rights are not absolute as the exercise of these rights is
limited by the school’s disciplinary policies. This limitation extends to off-campus activities and
even outside of school hours, and even in social media.
Tony’s actions were irresponsible and such practices violate the principle of truth telling and
honesty. Preserving the dignity of the attacked professor should have been the most fair thing
Tony should have done. Should tony be punished? No, but the schools have the moral obligation
to correct Tony’s actions and to provide him counselling services and direct him towards healthier
avenues to release his academic and assumed familial frustrations. If tony had a problem with his
professor, he should have been professional enough to muster the courage to talk to him,
shunning the cowardice that comes with hiding behind a laptop at home while spewing vulgarities.
Afterall, students continue to be students even when they log in on facebook. The continuing
requirement to observe school discipline and proper conduct cannot be whittled down simply
because the acts are done in cyberspace.

You might also like

pFad - Phonifier reborn

Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.

Note: This service is not intended for secure transactions such as banking, social media, email, or purchasing. Use at your own risk. We assume no liability whatsoever for broken pages.


Alternative Proxies:

Alternative Proxy

pFad Proxy

pFad v3 Proxy

pFad v4 Proxy