Should Audio-Video Recording Cameras Be Used In Elementary Public Schools?

[Truth7t7]

Audio-Video recording cameras are in almost all publicly owned areas, courthouses, motor vehicles offices, libraries, police vehicles and officers, on public roadways?

Why not the publicly owned elementary school classroom?

We aren't talking live camera, just recorded footage for a record of what has taken place in the classroom?

 

[Truth7t7]

Audio-Video recording cameras are in almost all publicly owned areas, courthouses, motor vehicles offices, libraries, police vehicles and officers, on public roadways?

Why not the publicly owned elementary school classroom?

We aren't talking live camera, just recorded footage for a record of what has taken place in the classroom?

My vote is yes, parents have a right to see what's going on in the public classroom, and have access to the record for personal use, just as police officer body cams

 

[PloverWing]

Well, I can see some positives and negatives.

Positive: Let's say Billy and Bobby start arguing in class, and maybe Billy hits Bobby. All those arguments about "He started it!" can now be resolved by looking at the camera footage.

Negative: There's now a semi-permanent record of Billy and Bobby misbehaving in class. Old-style, they sit in time-out for 10 minutes, or have some other punishment, and then it's over and gone. New-style, every misbehavior is on video.

Negative: Every student question and every wrong answer is also on video. Teacher asks what's the capital of Canada. Sally guesses "Toronto". That's the wrong answer. Old-style, the teacher asks for alternative answers, or maybe just gives the correct answer. New-style, Sally's mistake is on camera. If Sally knows that all her mistakes are going to be recorded, maybe Sally stops trying to answer questions, lest she give the wrong answer, or even stops asking questions, and just hides from the camera all year.

This second negative would, I think, outweigh the positives for me. I'd be concerned about learning being suppressed by setting up an environment where students are afraid to make mistakes in class.

 

[PloverWing]

A follow-up thought, with a potential positive: There were a couple of times during my kids' K-12 years when one of my kids wasn't "clicking" with a particular class or teacher, and I would like to have been able to see exactly what was going wrong, maybe to diagnose a personality clash or see what situations were causing frustration. A recording might have helped with this. I'd still be concerned with the stage-fright camera anxiety problem, though.

 

[Truth7t7]

Well, I can see some positives and negatives.

Positive: Let's say Billy and Bobby start arguing in class, and maybe Billy hits Bobby. All those arguments about "He started it!" can now be resolved by looking at the camera footage.

Negative: There's now a semi-permanent record of Billy and Bobby misbehaving in class. Old-style, they sit in time-out for 10 minutes, or have some other punishment, and then it's over and gone. New-style, every misbehavior is on video.

Negative: Every student question and every wrong answer is also on video. Teacher asks what's the capital of Canada. Sally guesses "Toronto". That's the wrong answer. Old-style, the teacher asks for alternative answers, or maybe just gives the correct answer. New-style, Sally's mistake is on camera. If Sally knows that all her mistakes are going to be recorded, maybe Sally stops trying to answer questions, lest she give the wrong answer, or even stops asking questions, and just hides from the camera all year.

This second negative would, I think, outweigh the positives for me. I'd be concerned about learning being suppressed by setting up an environment where students are afraid to make mistakes in class.

Positive: a recorded record of a progressive liberal teacher grooming children in abuse towards the woke agenda behind parents backs, also other inappropriate or unlawful behavior parents would object to

Negative: Not having the recorded record and give a child over to a progressive liberal teacher to groom and abuse, also other inappropriate or unlawful behavior

 

[Truth7t7]

I'd still be concerned with the stage-fright camera anxiety problem, though.

The stage fright would be interpreted that a teacher would perform as if parents were sitting in the classroom, "A Good Thing"

Honest and sincere teachers have nothing to worry about, it's the progressive liberal bad apples that will have the stage fright, and those engaging in inappropriate or unlawful behavior

 

[Hank77]

A follow-up thought, with a potential positive: There were a couple of times during my kids' K-12 years when one of my kids wasn't "clicking" with a particular class or teacher, and I would like to have been able to see exactly what was going wrong, maybe to diagnose a personality clash or see what situations were causing frustration. A recording might have helped with this. I'd still be concerned with the stage-fright camera anxiety problem, though.

If the kids are not reminded that the camera is there they will forget all about it. The worst thing would be a teacher using the recording as a threat to keep the class/student in line, thereby reminding the kids that the camera is there.

Personally, I like the idea for the same reasons that you have mentioned.

 

[Kale100]

Not sure about mandating it or having it a constant. If I were hypothetically in a position to make the decision regarding this, I'd propose rather than having a mandated camera there, allow students to record if they find it necessary. I mean, people (used to?) audio record college lectures all the time right? Start there see how it goes?

 

[disciple Clint]

Audio-Video recording cameras are in almost all publicly owned areas, courthouses, motor vehicles offices, libraries, police vehicles and officers, on public roadways?

Why not the publicly owned elementary school classroom?

We aren't talking live camera, just recorded footage for a record of what has taken place in the classroom?

I like the idea

 

[Truth7t7]

I'd propose rather than having a mandated camera there, allow students to record if they find it necessary. I mean, people (used to?) audio record college lectures all the time right? Start there see how it goes?

We're talking about elementary school classrooms, how many 1st/2nd/3rd graders have recording devices, hopefully not any?

 

[Kale100]

To be honest I wasn't paying too much attention to the word 'elementary', whoops
Kids do get cell phones younger and younger now though... my niece got one in 2nd grade I believe.
But yeah, elementary kids probably wouldn't have the wherewithal to really know if something should be recorded in the first place.

 

[dogs4thewin]

If the kids are not reminded that the camera is there they will forget all about it. The worst thing would be a teacher using the recording as a threat to keep the class/student in line, thereby reminding the kids that the camera is there.

Personally, I like the idea for the same reasons that you have mentioned.

It would depend on how old the child was a first grader may forget an 8th grader not as likely.

 

[SimplyMe]

Positive: a recorded record of a progressive liberal teacher grooming children in abuse towards the woke agenda behind parents backs, also other inappropriate or unlawful behavior parents would object to

Negative: Not having the recorded record and give a child over to a progressive liberal teacher to groom and abuse, also other inappropriate or unlawful behavior

Or, conversely, a Christian teacher gets recorded talking about Christ and the Bible; "also other inappropriate or unlawful behavior." This could easily cut both ways.

 

[Truth7t7]

Or, conversely, a Christian teacher gets recorded talking about Christ and the Bible; "also other inappropriate or unlawful behavior." This could easily cut both ways.

Talking about Jesus and The Bible isn't inappropriate or unlawful as you claim, the conservative US Supreme Court has ruled, the Liberal majority is gone now

The 6/3 Conservative Supreme Court has ruled, it's ok to pray at school and their functions, and private religious schools can receive public funding, gotta love it!​

​

The Atlantic​

The Supreme Court Has Ushered In a New Era of Religion at School​

For two centuries, America had kept questions of church and state at bay. The country is not ready for the ones to come.
July 15, 2022 By Adam Laats

Religious conservatives have been fighting for years to get prayer back into America’s schools, and this year, the Supreme Court gave them what they wanted. In Kennedy v. Bremerton, the six conservative justices affirmed a coach’s right to offer a prayer after a football game.

But what is really astonishing is that this decision will over time prove to be less monumental than the Court’s other big religion decision this term. In Maine’s Carson v. Makin, the Court ruled 6–3 that a state could not exclude private religious schools from receiving public funding only because of their religion.

 

[Hank77]

It would depend on how old the child was a first grader may forget an 8th grader not as likely.

I agree, but then that's who we were talking about elementary-level classes.

 

[Hank77]

But what is really astonishing is that this decision will over time prove to be less monumental than the Court’s other big religion decision this term. In Maine’s Carson v. Makin, the Court ruled 6–3 that a state could not exclude private religious schools from receiving public funding only because of their religion.

???
Isn't this a special tuition program set up for people who don't have public schools in their district and whose district hasn't contracted with any public school system? That means they only have access to private schools within a reasonable distance from their home. So the state set up this tuition program to help the parents pay for private school.
The SCOTUS said that the state couldn't deny tuition for all private schools including church-sponsored schools, schools sponsored by other groups, etc.
Technically it's public funds but the state isn't providing regular public schools for these kids.
That's the way I understand it but I could be wrong.

 

[Truth7t7]

???
Isn't this a special tuition program set up for people who don't have public schools in their district and whose district hasn't contracted with any public school system? That means they only have access to private schools within a reasonable distance from their home. So the state set up this tuition program to help the parents pay for private school.
The SCOTUS said that the state couldn't deny tuition for all private schools including church-sponsored schools, schools sponsored by other groups, etc.
Technically it's public funds but the state isn't providing regular public schools for these kids.
That's the way I understand it but I could be wrong.

The majority opinion Ruled on whether public funds could be used for religious schools, because the districts had restrictions on religious schools

The victory for religious parents was found in religious schools could not be excluded from payments based upon religion as was the case in Maine

I'm well aware of your suggestion on the family being in a isolated area with no school, but that wasn't the ruling of the court, it was (exclusion based upon religion) and Maine and the Districts laws excluded religious schools for payments, this was found unconstitutional

 

[SimplyMe]

Talking about Jesus and The Bible isn't inappropriate or unlawful as you claim, the conservative US Supreme Court has ruled, the Liberal majority is gone now

The 6/3 Conservative Supreme Court has ruled, it's ok to pray at school and their functions, and private religious schools can receive public funding, gotta love it!​

​

The Atlantic​

The Supreme Court Has Ushered In a New Era of Religion at School​

For two centuries, America had kept questions of church and state at bay. The country is not ready for the ones to come.
July 15, 2022 By Adam Laats

Religious conservatives have been fighting for years to get prayer back into America’s schools, and this year, the Supreme Court gave them what they wanted. In Kennedy v. Bremerton, the six conservative justices affirmed a coach’s right to offer a prayer after a football game.

But what is really astonishing is that this decision will over time prove to be less monumental than the Court’s other big religion decision this term. In Maine’s Carson v. Makin, the Court ruled 6–3 that a state could not exclude private religious schools from receiving public funding only because of their religion.

It's not quite the same for a teacher to talk of Jesus in school as it is for a coach to offer a prayer after a football game, where no student is required to attend.

 

[Truth7t7]

It's not quite the same for a teacher to talk of Jesus in school as it is for a coach to offer a prayer after a football game, where no student is required to attend.

Jesus Christ is a historical fact who walked this earth, and is the subject of untold books written on him throughout history, perhaps the subject needs to be in every classroom under history's most amazing figure?

A football game is a school sponsored event on school property, it has been determined that teachers have a constitutional right to express their beliefs in public schools, "Fact"

This recent 6/3 conservative ruling is a complete reverse from 60 years of liberal precedence, "religious speech is now back in the public schools" says a 6-3 conservative majority in the US Supreme Court, perhaps you need to read the majority opinion

President Donald J. Trump nominated three justices, 1.) Gorsuch, 2.) Kavanaugh, 3.) Barrett, and we are witnessing the hard turn in the "Right Direction" thank you Jesus!

 

[Hank77]

The majority opinion Ruled on whether public funds could be used for religious schools, because the districts had restrictions on religious schools

Agree

The victory for religious parents was found in religious schools could not be excluded from payments based upon religion as was the case in Maine

Agree, I said...
"The SCOTUS said that the state couldn't deny tuition for all private schools including church-sponsored schools, schools sponsored by other groups, etc."

Maybe I wasn't clear enough with this statement.

I'm well aware of your suggestion on the family being in a isolated area with no school, but that wasn't the ruling of the court, it was (exclusion based upon religion) and Maine and the Districts laws excluded religious schools for payments, this was found unconstitutional

The first paragraph of my previous post was some background info. on the case and not intended to instruct you as you were obviously aware of it. But other people come in, in the middle of discussions, and may not be aware of it.