> In emails and chat messages, students discussed violent impulses, eating disorders, abuse at home, bouts of depression and, as one student put it, “ending my life.”
Of course the email and chat apps had prominent "Your messages may be monitored, including by your teachers" notifications, right? Kids weren't misled into thinking their private conversations were private, right?
The point is they have no choice. There is no 'I don't want to be monitored' button. Just a message that says 'you are our bitch and there is nothing you can do about it'. The same as every other TOS for services that have become essential in our society and economy.
Don't they have the choice of communicating some other device or method? They are not forced to use the school computer. Many of them have phones, or a family computer.
It's not just the computer. They tend to be forced to use Drive, email, chat, etc provided by the school to meet their collaboration/participation part of the rubric.
Absolutely not. In my world, a disclaimer is the line between merely "not OK", and "criminal hacking punishable by prison time".
That's how users of RAT* software are treated - what makes this different? A legal notice they hid as best they could? Currently, that might make it legal, but morally it makes no difference.
But I didn't suggest a prominent notice because that makes it better (though it does - if I were spied on, I'd want to know). I suggested it because that would make the victims of surveillance fight it. You can't rebell against what you don't know about.
Of course the email and chat apps had prominent "Your messages may be monitored, including by your teachers" notifications, right? Kids weren't misled into thinking their private conversations were private, right?