While I think no ethical rules were broken, I do think that it might be considered unfair. Before one post a comment that criticize a person or a institution with which one has personal relation or interest, it would be appropriate to discuss it privately first, to see how they would react, or not, to the issue raised. After that, posting, in my opinion, would be fair game.

I also think that depending on what you criticize and how, it can be done in public. Certainly it’s tricky but if the purpose is to illicit feedback from a larger, different audience, it has its merits.

I’ve seen Acceptable Use Policies attacked, (and I’ve attacked them), I’ve seen sweeping calls for change, (and I’ve made them), and I’ve seen rants about how we need to radically shift our whole view of assessment, technology use, and teaching strategies, (and I’m ‘guilty’ of these as well). I think I might even have crossed a line or two in some, perhaps many people’s eyes.

People laughed at me & thought it was tasteless and unprofessional of me, when they found out I was moving to China via someone that read my blog… thinking it was an inappropriate way to be informed. (Meanwhile, my district/bosses and close family/friends were told first, and to be frank, many who were displeased were not as close to me as my blog readers). Why do I mention this? Because I chose to express myself in a different way than most and my choice to do so ‘crossed a line’ in their view.

Kyle expressed his thoughts in a professional way, seeking a change in what seems like an injustice. I congratulate Kyle for asking a question that matters, and not just making a statement but seeking the perspective of others.

I can count many that said more disparaging statements about standardized testing, the No Child Left Behind policy and for that matter the people themselves that support(ed) these things.

If we can’t talk about policies we don’t like, if we can’t put things under the microscope and reflect, then why even bother being an educational blogger?
.-= David Truss´s last blog ..Product You =-.

BTW, I really value your insights and perspectives. Thanks for the comments.

Oh yeah, they do: blogs.

- Shelly

This is my favorite type of blog post, one where the writer is passionately involved due to a direct personal connection with the topic. I think that Kyle did a marvelous job of making his post about the topic and not a personal attack towards the school. This is surely not the only school in Canada that has this type of contradiction between its mission statement and its written policy. I would venture to say that all of the high schools on the continent should look at their missions and/or core values and see if they really live them in their policy decisions or the way they treat all students on a daily basis.

I believe that the Principal should have called Kyle and told him how proud he was of his post and in addition he should have thanked Kyle for citing this injustice. Lisa put it well in her comment in talking about the importance of policy decisions being transparent.

We need a tidal wave of educators with Kyle’s combination of passion and respect to move the agenda in our schools!

Is it because this is a small institution where individuals are more clearly identified?

Kyle can indeed blog about it after informing the principal, though I would say that it’s an unfair thing to do if the principal is making any effort to address the issue. Posts like this get officials in trouble, and I fairness dictates that the blogger consider that.

Where I differ is where you say Kyle was unprofessional in identifying the school involved. He didn’t. From reading what Dean has shared here and what Kyle wrote on his blog post he had his brother’s permission to discuss the issue on his blog. No one else involved is identified. You say that Kyle’s blog post “was not sufficiently vague that the school couldn’t be identified”. Can you point out where/how he identifies the school? I don’t read that anywhere.

Also, while I think the principal should have been extended the courtesy of hearing about Kyle’s concerns personally I don’t think that precludes Kyle blogging about it afterward in the way he did.

As I noted above, Kyle has raised an issue that effects students far beyond his brother or his brother’s school. It’s important to have these conversations in the open where many points of view can be brought to bear on figuring out how best to address this issue in schools. In this respect he acted accordance with the principles I mentioned above.

I think that’s getting closer to the correct approach. It’s interesting that those who live far away, like Ingrid, of course have no connection to the geography and don’t have a problem with the personalization. I’m thinking in hindsight, Kyle may have posed it as a generic problem, then contacted the school asking them to consider the change.

The issue is, I’m sure Kyle never even considered the possibility of affecting change. That was an unintended outcome. I’m guessing he simply wanted to raise the larger issues of inequity and used a personal experience to relay that message. I doubt if it even crossed his mind that the principal would have read it. I guess he should have but part of the power of blogging is to play with ideas on a global scale. In this case to get some broader perspectives and ideas.

I’m struggling with how he could have done that without some level of personal storytelling? Any ideas?

Would a private discussion with the administration of school resulted in discussion for policy change? We can’t assume that it wouldn’t have. I feel that we have to assume that people are doing the best that they can with the information that they have in the situations they are in (maybe naive but it lets me sleep at night). If we never directly speak to people/organizations and let them know how their policies, decisions, and actions affect ‘real live’ people then we can’t affect or expect change.

I think that if he really wanted change to occur he owed the school the chance to be made aware of the issue (privately, with all the personal details he wanted) before discussing specifics with the world. I know that I would wish to have that courtesy extended to me.

Blogging, twitter, etc. is the new journalism. Journalism is a crucial part of keeping citizens informed.

While I suppose I can understand if the feelings of someone involved got hurt, I think the blog post (knowingly) raised issues that were specific, but illustrative of a widespread problem. I did not read anything as a targeted attack. I live in North Carolina and have no idea what school was referenced by the post, nor do I care to find out. However, I was personally made aware of issues I had not before considered about practices that I had taken for granted (long ago) in my own education. Now I know better. I twitter to know better!

Politically speaking, perhaps the author can assuage/prevent embarrassment in the future by speaking first with with the people involved, letting them remedy the situation, and then blogging about the process. But I mention that only as a politically/professionally safe alternative/courtesy (and a decision made exclusively by the speaker/blogger), not as a preference.

Would it be different if this was a district policy? A state or national policy? Is it close to unethical because we’re more easily able to identify the policy to specific people?

The world is full of spaces, be it coffee shops or blogs where discussions of policy and ideas exist. I’m not sure that’s a bad thing. As for using personal friends, I’m sure Kyle showed this to his brother so I doubt whether it was done without consent of some sort.

The people need a voice and for some, the blog may be their voice!

I think he edges into ethical territory because he was defending his brother in a dispute against an institution; he has an argument that it was a utilitarian act.

By the way, etiquette IS ethics.

There’s a technical ethics issue… which Darren addressed. But personal ethics are just that… they are personal. I meant to say that – It’s Kyle’s responsibility to decide whether opening a public discussion on the issue is ethical and your responsibility to make it clear to him that he is making that decision.

I guess the argument could be made that the since the school nor principal was identified, it may not be a blindside.