Only authorized email may be used
By Ed Birch, Special Writer
The South Brunswick Board of Education unanimously adopted two new policies Monday night that limits how the district’s employees and students can communicate.
Policy 3283, Electronic Communications between Teaching Staff and Students and Policy 4283, Electronic Communication between Support Staff and Students saw an unusual debate that lasted well over an hour at Monday’s meeting.
Despite many objections by concerned citizens and students, the motion by member and Policy Chairperson Arthur Robinson was accepted unanimously by an 8-0 vote, with board member Harry Delgado absent.
The meeting opened with comments on the subject offered by Student Representative Sophie Balsamo.
"I would like the board to know that my peers and I recognize that the policy is state-mandated and understand that this policy was written in a way so as to have the best interest of the students and teachers in mind," she said. "However, we would like to ensure that in its implementation and utilization there is consideration and empathy where the students and teachers and their respective activities are concerned. This policy will, possibly quite drastically, alter the operation of numerous clubs, student organizations, sports teams, and many other extracurricular activities that use electronic communications, specifically texting, to pass information between students and teachers."
The new policy limit electronic student, teacher and staff interactions to only the school supported email and prohibits interaction from private accounts or social media.
"Organizations use texting as an efficient method of notifying members and groups that find themselves in a position where face-to-face contact and communication with each other is not possible nor practical," said Ms. Balsamo.
She gave an example of the high school Interact Club that is planning a trip to Robert Wood Johnson Hospital.
"The club will need instantaneous contact with their advisor both before the trip, in order to remain up-to-date on last minute necessary details and during the trip," she said. "Electronic communication has been a benefit to numerous students and teachers in the school. We do not resist this policy, but we ask the board to take into consideration any and all measures that can allow this trend to continue. This type of communication, between authority figures and subordinates will be common as we grow older."
Kingston resident and parent Daniel Kurz called the proposal "unwarranted and illegal."
"The proposal makes no provision for staff in various clubs." He said.
He further stated that the proposal "restricts free communication and is illegal according to the United States Constitution.Kevin Chen, President of the Senior Class at South Brunswick High School, said "the students are enraged by the proposed policy."
He called the policy "a very important matter" and asked that the policy be given further consideration before the vote.
Mr. Chen is also a member of the marching band and said he finds such communication from staff advisors very important.
Tylor Sanders, Vice President of the Student Council and captain of the Boy’s Cross-Country team, commented on the importance of the texts messaging to students.
"The ability to communicate with our advisor is crucial." Said Mr. Sanders. "If there is an issue at one of our events, we must be able to communicate this problem to our advisor. Furthermore, as a student athlete, the ability to communicate with our coaches in necessary to our training and to our safety."
He further suggested that the board should "allow coaches to send text messages to their captains, who could then relay the information to the rest of the team."
"We can not create a policy that creates fear," Monmouth Junction resident and attorney Eric Schlesinger said. "Our village is a digital community."
He then compared the imposition of such a policy to the reign of Adolph Hitler in Nazi Germany from 1933-1939.
Lisa Rogers reminded the board that "it is the responsibility of the parents to monitor their children’s digital communication."
She said that upwards of 80 percent of communications have good intentions and need not be monitored.
She further questioned why no district teachers appeared at the meeting to voice their opinions and asked the board members "who in the district will review everybody’s e-mails?’After this discussion, the question was called and passed unanimously.