DD facing suspension. Please Help.

[VoldemortsNipple]

Sorry if this is drip fed. I have only been informed this evening of this situation and most of my information is coming from DD.

DD is 16 and is in the sixth form attached to the school she has attended since she was 11. Throughout this time she has never been in more trouble than not turning up for band practice. She has represented the school on many occassions and was hoping to be chosen to go to Philadelphia next year on a student exchange programme.

It has transpired that on Wednesday morning a computer virus has attacked the school system. Apparently this virus could have caused thousands of pounds worth of damage and could have entered the school computer systems throughout the whole city.

At 10am this morning, dd was removed from lessons and taken to one of the offices and questioned by three senior members of staff. The virus has been traced back to a computer which DD was logged on to. DD admits that she was on this computer but denies that she had anything to do with uploading any malious software. She admits to using Tumblr to show her friend some pictures but says that she had no problem gaining access to the site. She certainly didnt click on any pop up links.

Now I am the first to support the school if they have any concerns and I understand that DD would have to be questioned about this incident as it has been traced back to her computer. However I am seriously concerned in the way my dd has been treated.

She was questioned by the 3 staff members about what she was doing on the computer and she admitted to using Tumblr. 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. It sounds like they then changed tactics and asked who else she had given her password to.

The head teacher then began to ask DD if she understood the seriousness of the situation. He told her that the company who provide the computer security want to see action taken against who is responsible. He told DD that this is a serious criminal offence in which she could face 6 months in prison. He said he would have to suspend her for two days to show the company he was taking action. They seemed to come back and forth throughout the day asking her questions.

DD was placed in isolation and was asked to write a statement while they went verify her statement with people she had been with. She was offered to go and get lunch by the teacher she was in isolation with but was frightened to go incase she was accused of asking people to back up her story.

DD was offered nobody to represent her or offer pastorial support. I dont mean a lawyer, but at the very least she should have been offered a teacher to give her some support and ask questions on her behaif. It wasnt until 3pm that they phoned her dad to inform him of the situation and tell him she was facing a two day suspension.

I also raised the question of the heavy handedness of the investigation, if it was appropriate. If other students accessing social networking sites would gave similar punishments. Probably not unless they had downloaded inappropriate material. I stated that they had not fulfilled their duty to make sure the website was blocked. But she hit back that DD had been on all kinds of sites throughout the morning so she had intentionally broke the rules of fair use.

She did put my mind at rest over the issue affecting the remaining time DD has in school. She said they are willing to draw a line in the sand and it would be treated as an isolated case. She is allowed to go on the Philadelphia trip she was worried about and they allowed her to go on a theatre trip last night, even though she was suspended at that point.

I'm actually falling asleep typing this so will have to go to bed. I'll finish updating tomorrow.

So I presume by that "explanation" that all pupils who access non-educational websites will also be excluded for two days

Doesn't explain or excuse the threats about criminal charges or the "need" of the external IT support for someone to be punished.

Cross-posted.

Still think there are questions to be answered by the governors regarding appropriate and consistent school policy. Plus the heavy handed threats - is that normal procedure?

In that case it sounds like the suspension was a "gut reaction" from the school, meant to frighten them all.

If there are no further consequences, I think you are probably better to let it go, as long as your dd isn't really upset at this stage.

Because she did do something wrong, so it's hard to argue she didn't.

So does the AUP provide that they are not allowed to access non-educational websites. If it does, does it state that the punishment should be suspension?

The virus claim is most likely a load of bollocks, the fact is that if they are remotely competent in IT, it shouldn't have been able to affect them at all.

I would have thought that while accessing non-educational websites is quite possibly unacceptable (although in many schools it would be fine e.g., at lunch time/free period) it's a minor offence, akin to not handing in homework or talking in lessons, and the punishment for that would not be suspension, but perhaps detention, or whatever.

If I knew enough about computers to develop or find a virus that would cause this sort of panic then I'm sure I'd also know enough to plan that it would be triggered at a later time, after I'd logged off. The school allow students to "book out" laptops, that's a recipe for mischief. I would suggest the school were at fault in not providing a laptop screened for malware.

The fact that the OP's daughter had been misbehaving would justify a ban on computer use for several weeks or detention or both but it doesn't justify exclusion from school. This is a panicked over-reaction. If written notice wasn't given it it also potentially illegal.

Best way to ensure there is no further consequences to the op's child is to politely make it clear that you would make sure there would be consequences for the school.

You may well want to let it go because you don't want to cause a fuss, or have had enough, or for a number of other reasons, but I think they have got away with murder. Appalling way to treat dd, threatening her with prison, FFS. IT-illiteracy on their part, panicking and blaming a child for their anti-virus software detecting a virus, FFS - which is exactly what it is supposed to do! You can't suspend a pupil for two days without a formal letter - I suspect that may be illegal. School management sometimes try to get away with stuff that really is out of order because they don't think anyone will know different.

edam,
It is quite simple, no letter, no exclusion or to be technical about it, it is termed an illegal exclusion.

I suspect this is a private school?

Thanks for confirming that, admission.

edam school management can get away with this sort of behaviour because they know parents are concerned about references. It isn't that parents don't know this sort of behaviour is a disgrace but that there is really very little power to do anything about it after the event, you can only remove your child. The governors might act to change the policy in future but they aren't going to sack the head for being stupid once.

OP you may want to let it go for now but once your child is safely out of the place do make sure that governors and other prospective parents are aware of this stupidity.

Sadly that's probably true. I dunno, if I was that parent in that situation, would threatening to sue the school if they gave a negative reference when THEY were the ones at fault, not the pupil, change anything?