Rob Vischer of Prawfsblawg has joined the ranks of law professors concerned about the ethics of facebook friendship with their students:
What does FB mean for the professor-student relationship? I'm not talking about whether the law school should use FB as a professional networking venture; I'm talking about what students know about you and what you know about your students. I still base my image of the law school professor on Phil Areeda, who I'm certain would have had me arrested if I had dropped by his office to chat about the weekend....
And now what have I become? Going out with students for a beer, fielding a flag football team, and playing basketball with students has always made me an enthusiast for the friendship that dare not speak its name, but now I've taken it to another level -- I'm FB friends with my students. I'm all up in their business, and they're in mine. Is it wrong? Is it a concern? Do any other faculty FBers deny student friend requests? Do you keep them on a separate friend list with more limited access to your page? At least for me, the notion of keeping a mysterious distance between students and myself was a non-starter, but have I (or my students) lost something in the process?
I commented on these issues in this post last year, responding to an earlier post by legal scholar Gene Koo. I still think that there is no problem with Facebook friendships between professors and students. It's a far from intimate relationship, to put it mildly. Of course, I don't put any extremely intimate or private material on my Facebook page; people who can see it are not "all up in [my] business." They just know a few basic facts about my work, background and interests. Putting much more than that up on Facebook is unwise for a variety of reasons that have nothing to do with academic ethics.
Students who see my Facebook page probably don't know as much about me as those who stop by my office regularly to talk about law, policy, or baseball. If the latter is a permissible form of student-faculty interaction, so too is Facebook "friendship."
But isn't there still a problem with you having access to your students, ahem, intimate or private details?
Funnily enough, there's a Facebook group dedicated to shutting down your blog:
Be afraid!
I don't find any real problems with the sharing of personal information and opinions with students on FB, but then again, I'm in the arts, not law. We tend to be a big family/community anyway.
Keep in mind that I am not teaching an environmental philosophy elective to an 19 year old pledging a fraternity. I know that my students both want and need to learn the material that I would argue has more practical importance than whether plants have souls. My personal life quite frankly is irrelevant. Their only concern should be if they can pass my exams and mine is whether they retain and understand the material.
Having said that, once a student has graduated, I don't see anything wrong with developing a personal/professional friendship outside the classroom.
What, exactly, is a facebook account?
The number of people over 30 who have FB pages is quite large, and is growing every day. At this point, the majority of my acquaintances (nearly all of whom, sadly, are over 30) have a presence on FB; it's becoming the exception rather than the rule to NOT be on.
It's an incredibly useful tool for staying in touch with people and for re-connecting with people whom you'd lost touch with for whatever reason, but in the professional environment it does create some potential issues--what happens if your boss friends you? A colleague with whom you are friendly at work but have no interest in knowing more about? Will ignoring those requests have consequences for your relationship with those people?
As with any new tech, there are new ethics rules that will need to be worked out.
A fool and his money are soon parted. Prof. Vischer is being foolish.
And remember, don't trust anyone over 30! Seriously, though, facebook jumped the generation gap about a year ago, and a lot of law profs are on it.
I in fact follow this approach myself. But I'm not sure that it is ethically required.
The teacher/student problem arises when Facebook users are more indiscreet with details of their personal lives than they should be. This is especially bad when they're professionals or pre-professionals. And is a problem that is not entirely limited to cyberspace, unfortunately. But if a professor handles this situation on Facebook like he would in the real world -- by maintaining a dignified, professional public facade -- the fact that the student "friend" may step over the line with the information she discloses is not much different than the professor walking across the Quad on a warm spring day and seeing his students partying or engaged in displays of affection that probably shouldn't be occurring in a public venue. And the Miss Manners solution is the same: Don't gawk, and for heaven's sake, don't join in!
And for what it's worth, virtually every member of my HS graduating class (1990) has a FB.
That approach works, to an extent. Half the fun, and all of the embarrassment, that comes from Facebook is not in what you post of yourself, but what your friends post of you - on your Wall, in photos that are tagged of you, etc.
So us twenty-somethings who got the accounts when we were in law school (back when FB required its members to have a .edu email address) should shut them down when we hit 30? Interesting.
This raises the issue of feeling obliged, because of other considerations, to add someone as a facebook friend. Not cool. So I think it is generally wrong for a professor to send a friend request to a student, because the student may not feel free to refuse the request.
Anyway, there's nothing interesting on law student webpages. Career Services drills it into everyone's heads that they will not get jobs if they put anything at all on their facebook profiles.
So, in the given example, those students who stop by to chat about policy and baseball have a personal relationship with you, but those who only show up in class have only a professional relationship with you. So they should be in your Linkedin network. :)
I know people who have over 500 friends/contacts on Facebook/Linkedin and I believe they're not getting out of the system what they're supposed to be. If you codify every person you meet as a friend then you've lost the distinction between friend and acquaintance and since you've thrown away information you've thrown away opportunity.
Doesn't anyone else remember stories of professors having students over for dinner and such? I know that LDS students at the military academies are routinely invited to the homes of professors who are also LDS, for example, and I seem to remember from my college visits that both Thomas Aquinas and St. John's (Annapolis) were full of similar behavior. It seems to me FB is a natural extension of that sort of thing.
And, for what it's worth, the "worst" thing I've learned about anyone from FB is that they're not straight (okay, and there's one guy who thinks it's hilarious to joke about eating babies.) The worst thing that anyone's learned about me is that I have a bizarre affinity for cottage cheese and that I was a profoundly geeky kid. It's a less-drunk version of a typical college social environment.
For those concerned about letting out too much information, FB can be highly customized to allow only certain people different access settings. Go here to get FB's 10 Privacy Settings Every FB User Should Know.
This link is to one of many on stories about myspace turning over identities of sex offenders. Face book hasn't sent in their list yet.
In my area, the local TV news is nearly non-stop scaremongering right now with all manner of these stories. As an example, one story was about a school teacher who was arrested some years later for sexual contact with a student of hers when he was 17 years old. The video graphics they used on the story though, were of swings on an elementary school playground. They also interviewed some woman who declared she just learned the story and was now "TERRIFIED".
Just because this blitzkrieg started as Obama came into office, doesn't mean the seeming $billions being spent came from this country, say as part of the secret bailout and/or stimulus. It could be the International Bankers bankrolling it. They have also recently whipped up China and Europe into a sudden hysterical frenzy, too.
I don't have a clear rationale other than prudence, and a desire to avoid the knowledge that comes with Facebook status updates "Steve Smith is completely hungover and hating to go to VAPs class right now" etc.
I also have another paranoid rule learned in my prior job-- when meeting with a student I ask that the door remain slightly ajar (this used to be a rule applied only to female students, but I now employ it universally).
Sure, these may be grounded in paranoia, but especially as a VAP it is best to not rock the boat-- that means minimizing the chances for rocking.
I'd be interested in hearing those reasons. I have refused to go onto facebook for a variety of reasons, including terrible privacy policies and claims that everything uploaded to their site now belongs to them. Facebook also strikes me as a took for social mischief. What point is there or purpose could there be for me to connect and communicate with old girlfriends, or even long lost acquaintances from chapters of my life that closed long ago?
I don't understand it, but am interested to hearing others' objections to facebook, or self-imposed limitations on using it.
additionally, i think that many are overestimating the propensity that law students may have to constantly be checking their professor's facebook pages... i don't think that they are THAT interested...
If you have a comment about spelling, typos, or format errors, please e-mail the poster directly rather than posting a comment.
Comment Policy: We reserve the right to edit or delete comments, and in extreme cases to ban commenters, at our discretion. Comments must be relevant and civil (and, especially, free of name-calling). We think of comment threads like dinner parties at our homes. If you make the party unpleasant for us or for others, we'd rather you went elsewhere. We're happy to see a wide range of viewpoints, but we want all of them to be expressed as politely as possible.
We realize that such a comment policy can never be evenly enforced, because we can't possibly monitor every comment equally well. Hundreds of comments are posted every day here, and we don't read them all. Those we read, we read with different degrees of attention, and in different moods. We try to be fair, but we make no promises.
And remember, it's a big Internet. If you think we were mistaken in removing your post (or, in extreme cases, in removing you) -- or if you prefer a more free-for-all approach -- there are surely plenty of ways you can still get your views out.