We're from the government and we're here to help....

I don't think that's clear at all. Statements from one or two student reps do not reflect the opinions or feelings of the entire student body. There was no uproar from the student body regarding this survey.

For one thing, nothing happened to those students who refused to take the survey.

And, for another, there are apparently no outpouring of complaints from the students who did take it, about how the school personnel handled the information after they obtained it.

So I don't think the brouhaha over the teacher has given them any rational reason to distrust the motives of the school system regarding the survey.

On the other hand, they should distrust this teacher's knowledge of the Constitution if he tells them this was a situation where their Fifth Amendment rights were applicable.

Oh, and I didn't taste alcohol in my 'dry' home or elsewhere until I was twenty one. My mother made my father throw that six pack of beer he probably wanted to share with me out, or leave. They did effectively separate, but not about that one issue.

Might have something to do with why I enjoy some wine. Marijuana? I was accused of that by my aunt and mother, who told the parish pastor. That was funny, but it wasn't really. They smelled it and were concerned. I didn't even try it until years after that, must have been my friends who stunk. Or, hysteria. (I have a poor sense of smell.)

Self incrimination has probably been a pickle in the jar of several millennia, and people wised up. Dryden was right with his advice - the 5th amendment was based on human behavior and he was casting an appropriate warning.

I think that the 5th is always inapplicable when agents of the state or their proxies are asking us to incriminate ourselves.

It's only an invasion of privacy if you are compelling them to answer the questions. The students did not have to participate--they were allowed to exercise their right to privacy.
If you choose to willingly answer survey questions, your privacy isn't being invaded.

No matter how you look at this situation, it's not a Fifth Amendment issue--and that was the mischaracterization this teacher made.

I was no goody-two shoes in high school, osso, nor were the people I went to school with, who were an exceptionally bright bunch. We challenged and questioned authority constantly. We had no trouble asserting our rights, even way back then. If we had been handed a survey like this one, no one would have felt cowed into participating, either they would have voluntarily done it, or they simply would have refused.

And I think it should be considered that those students who answered this survey, and admitted to risky behaviors, might have been asking for help from the school, because they knew there would be follow-up by social workers, and counselors, and school psychologists.

No, it is a blatant misuse of authority.

So, did that survey purveyor company give them a discount? Do they sales rep this stuff?

No, it's not always applicable. It only protects against abuse of government authority in a legal procedure. And it definitely did not apply in the situation with this school survey, where no one was being put in legal jeopardy, regardless of how they answered the survey questions.


But you seem to have your own unique interpretations of the Constitution.

Based on what?

What laws prevent a school from surveying students, and asking for voluntary participation in such a survey?

Sanity.

You as a teacher do not own your students and their information about their ongoing lives.

Asking them to fill out the forms you pass out about their lives is sludgey,

I'd worry about a school that was unconcerned about substance abuse problems, or other risky behaviors, or serious emotional issues, in its student body.

At least this school system was trying to address those issues. That's not an abuse of authority--it's quite the opposite. It indicates concern for the welfare and well being of the students.

And those students who admitted to having problems on this survey would, in effect, have been asking for help and intervention--because they knew they were identifiable, and that a follow-up with school personnel would occur. Doing it through the survey might have been easier for them then asking for the help more directly.

The reference to the Fifth Amendment may have been applied incorrectly, although I'm not certain of that, but I don't think the reference was inappropriate.

It used to be generally agreed that women should not vote and that black people shouldn't marry white people (among many other more egregious examples of "general agreement" we can pull from history).

Just because the school board agreed doesn't mean that they're in the right.

That's called an appeal to authority, and it's considered a logical fallacy.

Other than that, we can probably assume the school board was completely unbiased on the issue.

Way too sly, way too sly.

A) the teacher is authority figure
B) I'm not clear that most of the teachers told the students they didn't have to answer the questions, but even if so, they were authority figures passing them out (oh, maybe this will help me get out of having a D grade).
C) there are other ways to be open to students and their problems than by passing out invasive surveys with their names (I don't like anonymous ones for the reason I mentioned earlier, but am less frenetically opposed, though still opposed.)

Being concerned about substance abuse = good.

Anonymously surveying students about substance abuse = good.

Surveying students about substance abuse using the students' identity = bad.
(It's bad for several reasons. First, you are unlikely to get accurate data. Savvy students will recognize that the data can be misused, and will not answer honestly. Second, the data can be misused.)


Teacher educating students = good.

Teacher educating students about civil rights = good.

Teacher advising students to use critical thinking skills = good.

Teacher placing himself/herself in direct opposition to the wishes of the school board = roadkill.

Easier for them when asking what they shouldn't be asking?

There are other ways for teachers to show themselves to be open to helping students besides some purveyed survey that is by definition invasive.

The reference was inappropriate because it suggested the students would be placing themselves in legal jeopardy by their answers if they admitted to criminal behavior--that's what self-incrimination means in the context of the Fifth Amendment--you might place yourself in legal jeopardy by what you reveal, which is why you have a right against self-incrimination. Since there was no threat of legal jeopardy for these students, regardless of what they revealed, the reference to taking the 5th was definitely inappropriate.

Other teachers let the students know they didn't have to answer the questions, but only this teacher got into trouble over it, and the bone of contention appears to be the fact that this one referenced the Fifth Amendment, which conjured up associations with law enforcement and inaccurately suggested the school might place the student in legal jeopardy over criminal behaviors revealed on the survey.

I don't think this teacher was thinking clearly when he mentioned the Fifth Amendment, and he really admitted as much when he said he was thrown off guard by the students' questions and concerns because he hadn't had much time to consider the questionnaire before he was given it to distribute. But, he really should have known, as someone who teaches about the Bill of Rights, that the students would not find themselves in legal jeopardy regardless of how they answered the questions, and he could have reassured them on that score. And then he could have just told his students that they have a right to privacy, and were under no compulsion to answer the questions.

It really was his mentioning the Fifth Amendment that got him into difficulty. It implied the school system was acting as an agent of law enforcement, and that's why students should invoke their right against self-incrimination.

And that's where he was wrong.

No one, including the school board, is saying that the students don't have a right to privacy, and that they can't refuse to answer questions on surveys like this. Nothing happened to the students who didn't want to participate.

This teacher just didn't handle the situation well. It's a privacy issue, not a criminal matter, and he confused the two for his students, and misconstrued the motives of the school in the process.

I really doubt that his reprimand will go beyond docking him one day's pay. It will be interesting to see if he chooses to take any legal action against the school system.

Oh, did he say that?


"It really was his mentioning the Fifth Amendment that got him into difficulty. It implied the school system was acting as an agent of law enforcement, and that's why students should invoke their right against self-incrimination."

And that's where he was wrong.

I think the man was reacting instinctively and well, and I think you are lunching.

I agree. I think he didn't have time to think about what he wanted to say and said the first thing that came into his mind. Big deal about the 5th Amendment being used inappropriately. Enough about that already. Splitting hairs.

More to the issue is that he tried to warn them about a violation of their privacy and personal habits.