DD facing suspension. Please Help.

I wouldn't be accepting this at all.

But if you are serious about dealing with it, a few questions:

• is this state or private?
• have you been given written notice of their decision, with a reason, and if so, what does it say?
• what is the name of the virus in question

They simply cannot suspend her for accidentally infecting the school computer with a virus (or not, it seems, because it sounds like the virus was quarantined). That is no more reasonable than suspending her for giving someone a cold.

They would need to detail specific offences, e.g. deliberately bypassing the school security systems/blocking software, or whatever, with reference to the school's disciplinary policy, AUP, and so on.

It's quite possible that the alleged 'virus' is nothing of the kind of course.

The ignorance displayed is almost as bad as the suspension.

Gobsmacked by this ,furious on your behalf ,sad for daughter .

Sounds like your daughter is being made a scapegoat for someone's error ,slackness .

The school will close ranks of course ,and that includes the governors .
Don't let it put you off persuing justice .
Take someone with you to your meeting ( someone with knowledge of the law ) and ask for someone to take minutes .

Probably your only really effective course of action is the local press .

Schools are such bullies !

What exactly did your daughter say she did? If she has been downloading from dodgy music sites at home and took in a USB stick to upload pictures at school that is slightly different to clicking on a link. Either way a 2 day suspension is excessive but clicking a link means the school is blaming a child for their inadequate software and taking in a corrupted USB is slightly more culpable.

You might want to look at just what is on your daughter's laptop. If she doesn't have it already you could download and run malwarebytes www.malwarebytes.org/ If that shows nothing nasty you're in a stronger position to argue that whatever happened was due to their inadequate protection.

I would insist the school supplied me with a copy of the statement they had obtaned from my child, copies of any other statements they have and of the evidence that this was not a simple accident. I'd tell them that I wanted this evidence examined by my own IT expert and an apology from them if this was shown to be accidental. I'd ask why they didn't block tumblr if they considered it to have no educational value. I would not have stopped at a 5 minute conversation with the head of 6th form but would have insisted on speaking to the head.

Has she gone into school and if not has she been given work to do? If she hasn't then they may be unlawfully denying her the right to an education. You should have been given written notice if this is a state school. Te statutory guidance is here media.education.gov.uk/assets/files/pdf/s/the%20school%20discipline%20pupil%20exclusions%20and%20reviewsengland%20regulations%202012.pdf

Have you had a letter confirming the fixed term exclusion of 2 days?
If you have not had that letter then there is no fixed term exclusion, without it there is no legal basis for the exclusion. There is however no set time for the letter to be given to you only that it is done "without delay". There is no reason why the school could not by now have got the letter delivered to you and if they just give you the letter on Thursday, that is not good at all.
You say that the reason now given for the exclusion is for downloading a virus but originally you were talking about it being for being on Tumblr on the school IT system. The school need to have carried out a proper investigation to be able to confirm the fixed term exclusion. They can clearly demonstrate that for being on Tumblr, by your daughter's admission and a very easy look at the computer log. Whilst I am no expert on computers I suspect it is very much more difficult to prove, on the balance of probability, that the virus was downloaded by your daughter, even if it was via the computer terminal that she was using. So we are back again to what the exclusion letter says as to whether the exclusion is provable.
Part of the exclusion code talks about the need for the exclusion to be fair and proportionate. Part of that is around, what does the behaviour policy and ICT policy of the school say in relation to the crime committed but the other part of fair is that the school is being even-handed in that the punishment handed down to your daughter is equivalent to what happens to others who similarly transgress. If you have evidence to show that has no happened or can show that the school has made no attempt to seal the vast gaping hole in their "secure" system then it is questionable whether it is an appropriate punishment, as your daughter has been made a scapegoat.
The other thing that you should be aware of for your meeting on Thursday is that under the current exclusion code any exclusion of less than 5 days cannot be reinstated by the governing body, they can only put on record on the pupil's file, their findings.

Another one livid on your behalf and I'm fucked if I'd be waiting till Thursday for this meeting...

So, I take it your dd wasn't at school today? So that's already one day of the exclusion?
I would turn up there tomorrow with her in tow and demand to see someone first thing, with a view to her returning to classes once you've finished.

That is outrageous - I'd be raising merry hell. There are viruses on the internet, people click on them by accident - that is what sodding virus checkers are for! If school won't budge, go for governors and LEA if need be. And waiting until Thursday - sounds like they want it done and dusted before you have a chance to complain, which is doubly outrageous.

Exactly what CopthallResident said.

Tumbler is something they use almost as commonly as Facebook. They all have it, certainly my DDs do, and have had for a long time to my knowledge (if they don't let us see what they are doing on their computer when I go in, it gets confiscated). We have had problems with viruses when they have accessed sites to download music and American TV shows, and those sites are most certainly dodgy, but not Tumbler. I would expect a school to have cottoned on to it's existence and to have blocked it. They should be keeping up with what sites they are using anyway as they can be posting things into the public domain that damage the reputation of the school, and encourage online bullying, apart from anything else. We had those issues with Formspring, another site that became a bit of a trend. It is an issue for us as parents too. Tumbler seems if anything to be a more supportive thing, it's about posting images, mainly fashion and bands, and if you put together a good portfolio then people follow you, or at least that is how DD uses it. I suppose you could even argue at a stretch it is educational, in that it has an artistic element .

I agree with OohMrDarcey and Edam that this sounds to be more to do with the IT illiteracy of the teachers who decided on this actions and their being intimidated by the IT company who may well be covering their own backs. It raises the question of why the welfare of the child wasn't made the priority in this process instead of her becoming a scapegoat in what was basically grown up politics. Personally I would be going into school and asking them to clarify exactly what proof they have of what your daughter has done, and if it is no more than having gone on Tumbler and perhaps not even been aware that a virus had downloaded itself, ask for justification for the treatment she received and two days exclusion. Is that the standard punishment for going on sites that aren't educational? As I said before all I did was upload something to Oxford University's intranet for a nasty Trojan to get into my computer, I didn't even click on anything. Do these IT bods really know what the strategies of the latest hackers are?

I also think that the school owe you more than a five minute phone call. I know that when DCs are excluded at my DDs school the parents are automatically called in for an interview with the Deputy Head and Head of Year, with the child, on the first day of exclusion so everyone is clear about why, and what needs to happen to improve the behaviour of the DC concerned, and the consequences if it hasn't. Does this school have ANY strategy for delivering pastoral care to their pupils?

This is absolutely ridiculous. A suspension is a serious matter (or it should be). The school owe you a full explanation, not least because your DD will be missing 2 days of teaching time, and I'd want there to be a bloody good reason why this was the case.
It sounds like they've handled the whole thing incredibly badly-I don't see why you should have to wait till Thursday for an explanation. Totally crap.

OMG!! Your daughter is being used as a scapegoat because their anti virus software was not fit for the job.

Your daughters crime was using an unauthorised website in lesson time - hardly a suspendable offence.

Something is not right here - not least making you wait until Thursday (pretty much a WHOLE week since the event) for a meeting. You need to go tomorrow and demand a meeting. The school have been very underhand and I would be suspicious about what may not be available by Thursday in your daughters defence.

You need to go in before she completes her suspension - it wont be easy to undo from her school record once its completed.

Something very very fishy with this! It smacks of some underhand dealings.

wtf they have actually suspended her?! she didnt do anything, if it uploaded accidentaly (highly likely) that is NOT her fault! i cannot believe the way the school spoke to her and the threats they may! totally outrageous.

i would be involving the governors and the lea if you have.

I'm with oohmrdarcy, the way your daughter has been treated is outrageous and I'd be furious. Appears to be a bizarre combination of IT illiteracy, general stupidity, arrogance and fear on their part- fear they have screwed up somehow so your dd is a convenient scapegoat.

Personally I'd use the things I picked out and challenge them as obvious lies. But that's probably because I picked 'em out, other people may have better ideas!

Tumblr isn't a dangerous site, and wouldn't automatically come under social media so wouldn't be blocked as default - however if it went against their usage policy they should have it blocked- VERY easy to do. Put the onus on them for that one

Also - she has been suspended for uploading viruses... how?! If she clicked a link by mistake then I'm sorry but BOLLOX to being suspended for that, if they think she plugged in a USB or something with it on that should be easy to prove or not as the virus scan log would show if it scanned a usb disk (or external disk)

I would be absolutely fuming tbh and no way would I put up with my daughter being excluded for accidentally clicking a link FFS. As I said previously I work in IT , I have seen people who should have known better do far worse - I mean jesus, mistakes happen and the WHOLE point is that they are dressed up to look like something else!

At that point I would be going back all guns blazing and I don't care if that makes me over the top mum, its fecking stupid! You would not believe how many viruses are stopped day in day out, its the whole fucking point of AV software - I am seething on your behalf here

Hi OP, any joy with the school?

Hope that you and your DD are feeling better.

OP - How is your DD today? Have you been intouch with the school and made any progress in getting this matter resolved?

Agree with Edam and Copthall. In my own experience as a teacher in two different schools the punishment for accessing a site when you aren't supposed to would be removal of IT privileges for a couple of days. But most teachers would only do that if the child ignored a warning to stop. Certainly not suspension.
OP the school have handled this very, very badly.

At work, sites like Tumblr, Facebook etc. are blocked. It is not possible to get on. The school should have implemented a similar system - end of.

Apart from that, I agree with everyone who says the school have been unreasonable and heavy handed.

BBJ OK my child could upload a virus - but they wouldn't know how to create one or where to get one in a way that wouldn't damage their own computer. To create a virus that causes havoc in a school system requires a degree of knowledge that the OP's child may not possess. That is what I meant to say.

If she does possess that degree of knowledge then the school should perhaps scrap their contract with the security firm and employ the 16 year old.

The OP said the school don't ban Tumblr - since I didn't get onto the site I don't know if she could have had some legitimate educational reason for being there. Even if she didn't suggesting to a child that she has committed a serious criminal offence and interviewing them about that without a parent present is not acceptable. Asking them to explain what had happened would be acceptable but not accusing them of a crime.

Agree with Copthall and Edam. This thread has made me really angry and I don't even know you/your DD OP. I'd be in there tomorrow requiring answers.

I hope your DD is ok-she must have had an awful weekend.

The teachers put themselves in the wrong by the way they handled this. 'They informed her that this wasnt the kind of virus that you get from clicking on something and you would know what you were doing.' Very likely bollocks meant to intimidate - I'd call them in this. It is very probably a downright lie.

'He told DD that this is a serious criminal offence in which she could face 6 months in prison.' That is a blatant, deliberate lie.

'He told her that the company who provide the computer security want to see action taken against who is responsible.' Very probably not the truth, whole truth and nothing but the truth. I doubt the company jumps to the assumption that an attack = a child has deliberately done something dangerous and wrong and I doubt they insist children are suspended. And it's not in their power to insist anyway.

So out of the people involved in this situation, I'd say whatever your dd got up to may well have been a breach of their policy, but is probably minor compared to adults in a position of authority knowingly lying repeatedly, bullying and intimidating.

admission a two day suspension would be completely over the top for a pupil who has accessed Tumbler from a school computer and has an otherwise good record of behaviour. A 2 day suspension was the punishment meted out at DDs school to the serial offender who walked out of school in plain sight of everyone at 11am, after a previous 2 day suspension for "borrowing" my daughter's tracksuit bottoms, with watch in pocket when she was absent from school. As the injured party I thought that punishment fitted the crime of a girl who had serious behaviour problems (and I do not anticipate her suspensions will appear on her UCAS reference, though you would hope there would be some hint) . She certainly wasn't barred from future priviledges, indeed was given a prize for "effort" at the end of the year A warning and denying access to the computer system would be more fitting.

The issue here though is that the punishment, and the way in which OPs DD was treated, appears to be based on the assumption that OPs DD is guilty of malevolently downloading a dangerous virus which could have caused £000s of damage . An assumption based on the say so of the company employed to protect the school's systems from viruses, which they manifestly failed to do. As others have posted it seems unlikely that they could provide absolute proof DD did that. I would also expect my DDs school to take into account DDs behaviour record and personality and provide appropriate support in that context pending having absolute proof of guilt, well behaved pupils don't normally embark on a spree of deliberate vandalism, especially if they have standard teenage computer skills, rather than being a Gary Mckinnon.

I think OP is quite right to suspect that the school has been very heavy handed and owes her a full explanation.

If this system is a non virtual system it is possible that the virus could have been dormant with in the OS or BIOS and could have been there for sometime.