to think my DD should not have to sign an agreement promising not to criticise the school on social media?

[cinnamontoast]

The Home-School agreement now includes a clause saying they should 'not make negative comments about the school or individuals' on social media. My feeling is that this a) infringes their freedom of speech, b) demonstrates a draconian attitude and an astonishing lack of confidence on the part of the school, and c) makes them more, rather than less, likely to go on Facebook and slag off the school.
But perhaps I'm overreacting? Thoughts, please!

Tbh I am ok with this. Children and adults need to realise social media is not the correct place to air grievances.

Tbh I find the whole 'name and shame on social media' very tedious and never helps resolve a problem.

Many jobs have this sort of clause, just preparing them for RL.

Completely agree with not mentioning people in a negative light

Sorry, I know where you are coming from but this is sensible. Let's face it most work places now have this either in the contract or the staff handbook. Makes it much easier to deal with the many issues that schools have to deal with around social media. Unlikely to discipline anyone saying St Cuthberts is rubbish. But easier to deal with Mrs Smith is a cunt or Melanie sleeps around. If they are trying to produce responsible young adults then it seems ok to me to replicate the constraints at work and help tackle bullying.

What happens if you don't sign the agreement?

I think it's good for when kids are in work as it's the same there.

I think it's a good idea too.

YABU. It seems perfectly acceptable to me. Teenagers can be horrible with no real cause.

I agree with the school.
They must have had enough of unpleasant cases to come up with this policy.

I would like the school to promote a sensible attitude to use of social media and I would support it in that. But getting the pupils to sign an agreement is a strong-arm tactic that's bound to misfire. And why stop at social media? Why not say they can't criticise the school in letters to the local paper, say, or chatting to neighbours? To me, it demonstrates that they fear social media and don't understand it. They're trying to put the genie back in the bottle.

I think you are hugely overreacting. What do you want her to be able to say on social media? Do you actually want her to have carte blanche to make negative comments about individuals at the school? But presumably when she's the target it won't be ok with you?
I think it's a very sensible policy and one that should have been implemented many years ago.

But we don't have "freedom of speech" I can't go on social media and say that my boss is a wanker without their being consequences and your child can't go on Facebook and slag off their teacher or classmate without similar consequence.

Seems fair to me. If a pupil or their parent has an issue with the school or with a teacher there are more appropriate channels than FB through which to address them.

YABU
Plenty of employers have similar. Plenty of employees wish their employers had similar when they have to deal with the fall out from ill judged comments.

It also doesn't mean the school aren't confident in themselves.

It means they recognise that some children (and parents for that matter) will always blame the school even if their behaviour is causing the problem.

It also means that they know than teens don't always have the best judgment before ranting on social media, if they did it as an adult it could lead to losing a job. Best to start them in best practice now.

It's not that I want her to criticise the school on social media but that I think the school is handling this the wrong way. It is the only part of the Home-School agreement that refers to life outside school. THere's a limit to how much control the school can, or should exert.

It is a very good idea to get hung people to sign a contract stating this.

Once something is out there on social media it is there for all the world to see. If you moan to a neighbour or friend about a crap teacher that is one person and it is not written down in black and white. You go to the paper they decide whether to report the information and will probably check the facts and the source.

You put it on fb and Mrs Crap Teacher might see it, or her friends, family, neighbours, colleagues, governors, other pupils etc. It says to me they really do understand social media and are right to fear it.

A little background here: three days before the general election in May, a Tory rally, headed by David Cameron, took place at the school. It was all over Twitter. Several sixth formers took to Twitter to express their outrage that their school was being used in a way that pointed towards political bias. They were then hauled into the head's office and made to delete their Tweet. I'm pretty sure the social media clause wasn't in the agreement last year and is a result of this incident.
However, it wasn't just the sixth formers who publicly criticised the school on social media for holding the rally: one of the governors did; parents did; teachers from other local schools did. It seems the school is now trying to head off any other potential criticism. So we're not just looking at calling a teacher a wanker. If they want to do that, presumably they can go on Rate My Teacher.

I completely agree with the school.

Ultimately it doesn't make a difference whether she signs it or not. If she disparages the school on social media there will be disciplinary consequences.
What this does is draw her attention to that and ask for her cooperation forcing her to acknowledge the issue. I don't see a problem here.

Also agree with the school.

Sorry xposts. I think that is possibly one that should be addressed separately and I would hope the school would commit to not doing that again!

Surely we need to distinguish between name calling/insults - which would be unacceptable in public in any circumstances - and justified criticism.