Art teacher in hot water over topless photos

[Electro Funk]

http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/06/16/naked.teacher.ap/index.html


AUSTIN, Texas (AP) -- Until they found the topless photos, Austin High School officials considered Tamara Hoover an excellent art teacher with a knack for helping students find their creativity.

Now, she's fighting for her job.

The photos, which were posted on Flickr.com by her partner, depict Hoover in the shower, lifting weights, getting dressed, in bed and doing other routine activities.

Hoover said Friday the photos are art and makes no apologies.

"I'm an artist and I'm going to participate in the arts," Hoover said. "If that's not something they want me to do then I want to be told that. I don't feel as if I was doing anything that was beyond expectations."

The school district said the photos were inappropriate and violate the "higher moral standard" expected of public school teachers. As she was escorted out of class last month she was told that she's become an ineffective teacher.

The district wants to revoke her teaching certification, which would keep her out of Texas classrooms permanently. Hoover will appeal the ruling and is prepared to take the case to court, she said.

Hoover's abrupt dismissal highlights a new concern for employees: Your boss has Internet access, too.

"People don't realize when they put their entire diary out there, they're giving very private information to the public," said Kate Brooks, director of career services for liberal arts students at the University of Texas at Austin.

The photos came to light last month as a result of a feud over ceramics equipment with another art teacher, according to sworn affidavits. Students who had seen the pictures showed the teacher, who then notified school officials.

Austen Clements, one of Hoover's students, noted that many artists have nude pictures, including Georgia O'Keeffe.

"If Georgia O'Keeffe wanted to teach at Austin High, I don't think they'd say, 'No, you have nude pictures online,"' Clements said.

The school was attended by President Bush's daughters, Barbara and Jenna.

---------------

The pics on flickr can be found without much effort....

Should she be fired? i found them to be rather harmless... Some are a bit bizaar, but i found them far from pornograpghy in my opinion.... others would disagree i guess...

what do you think?

[iGary]

Can you provide the Flickr link with a warning so I don't have to play Clue? ;)

[eva01]

Can you provide the Flickr link with a warning so I don't have to play Clue? ;)

hahahha i hated clue

[Deepdale]

Another titillating thread.

[amacgenius]

I'd have to see the pictures before I passed my judgement.

[Phat_Pat]

if there topless photos that can be considered art thats fine... just be ready for weird stares from your students

if shes standing next to a vibrating bed with a weight in one hand and a whip in another... than wii may have a problem

someone grab the link

[tangerineyum]

i think the photos have been taken off of flikr. I saw them before they were taken off, and i must say she must have led a wild life. she looks less like a 29 year old art teacher and more like a 50 year old lifetime chain smoker. The photos overall seem very benign, nothing to get upset over, except the part about her being naked. It's not like she strattling a midget or anything. :rolleyes:

Here is her myspace
http://myspace.com/mshoover

[Electro Funk]

Can you provide the Flickr link with a warning so I don't have to play Clue? ;)

for you iGary.... anything :p

links to the flickr photos can be found here....

http://forums.klbjfm.com/index.php?showtopic=35207

read through a few posts and more than a few poeple have linked to some of the pages....

the first link has no nudes, the rest of the links do... (i think)

[j26]

http://savemanny.blogspot.com/2006/06/hs-teacher-ms-hoovers-artistic-nudes.html

Warning: Contains nudity


Edit: Not any more

[skunk]

Looks harmless enough, and certainly not a chain-smoking 50-year old.

[Deepdale]

if shes standing next to a vibrating bed with a weight in one hand and a whip in another...

That means you better have the homework submitted on time or else! Nothing like a real incentive to keep me in good standing.

[eva01]

she has an ibook

http://www.flickr.com/photos/celestadanger/162624162/

:P

[Electro Funk]

titillating.

i love that word :D

[Deepdale]

i love that word :D

Don't we all?

[Electro Funk]

Looks harmless enough, and certainly not a chain-smoking 50-year old.

look at j26's link.... there are nudes of her in the tub...etc....

Whilst i still think they are harmless, obviously others do not....

[Phat_Pat]

http://savemanny.blogspot.com/2006/06/hs-teacher-ms-hoovers-artistic-nudes.html

Warning: Contains nudity
i'd never look at my teacher the same way again

[Deepdale]

i'd never look at my teacher the same way again

If I was back in HS, I'd be up for detention all next week.

[Electro Funk]

If I was back in HS, I'd be up for detention all next week.

Detention? i'd be up for out of school suspension! :p

oh whait... that did happen anyways... :o (but im not telling why!) :D

[QuarterSwede]

Sure this is considered art. Who can say otherwise? The problem here is that she is teaching art to a very impressionable age group (this isn't college were they are mature enough to handle the topic). I know she isn't teaching the art of nude photography or painting, etc. but she needs to understand that she is still a teacher when she is not teaching and represents her school when not at work.

Also, Georgia O'Keeffe is a bad example since the school would be hiring her with the understanding that she has nude photos prior to her employment.

[Leareth]

Not porn .

You know this is a story from the US, in Europe they would not give a damn about a topless woman
or nudes that dont show anything .

The porn these "impressionable" young people are watching in much much worse than this .
plus havent they seen a naked person by now?
.
maybe being raised in europe and seeing my profs on the beach mostly top less did alter my outlook on nudity and such. but I have found North America to be just prudish when it comes to showing off all skin as opposed to the skanky items that pass as clothes you see in magazines, posters and in schools.

[killuminati]

It disgusts me how uptight the US is with regards to nudity. Nudity is the most natural thing in the world and they treat it like some sort of dirty sin.

For example in movies, if there is just a brief sexual scene like a womans ass, the movie will automatically get an R rating.

I remember Lost in Translation received an R rating in the US, just because of one short scene when you see a woman topless. The rest of the film was PG, there wasn't any cursing or any other unsuitable content. In Canada, the film got a PG rating.

[sorryiwasdreami]

If she's fired, freedom of speech doesn't exist.

[IJ Reilly]

I wonder, does Texas still do the stocks, public flogging, dunking and burning at the stake? It's so hard to know which is the most appropriate Medieval punishment for the crime of being such a wanton floozie.

[AoWolf]

If she's fired, freedom of speech doesn't exist.

Because showing pictures of herself nude is speech?

Moral or not you have to look at this from her employers point of view. If the public sees this as a bad thing they will be seen in a bad light. If the school was a private company she would be gone the next day. This was not a private thing either it was posted on the internet.

[IJ Reilly]

Because showing pictures of herself nude is speech?

Actually, yes. The Supreme Court decided long ago that art was protected under the First Amendment (which, if you read it you will find, protects more than free speech).

[thedude110]

I understand the concerns of the district. Teachers occupy this weird political space -- depending on who you ask we're role models, parents, knowledge dispensers, disciplinarians, etc. And whether right or no, if teachers have a stake in their community (if teachers are teaching not just for a paycheck but for the betterment of the lives of their kids), then they make a significant impact on local decision making.

The question here should be "How do these sets of photographs impact the teacher's ability to do her job well?" If this costs her respect in her schoool, if this impacts her ability to treat students fairly (because it impacts her ability to dispense discipline), if this impacts her ability to work with her colleagues on important distrcit and school initiatives, it seems reasonable for the district to conclude that she can't perform her job as she needs to.

Don't misread this. I'm pro-nudity, pro-teacher, pro-first ammendment, pro-employee's rights.

But I'm also pro-quality of education. Should this negatively impact her ability to produce learning, she should be relieved of her position.

[Electro Funk]

I understand the concerns of the district. Teachers occupy this weird political space -- depending on who you ask we're role models, parents, knowledge dispensers, disciplinarians, etc. And whether right or no, if teachers have a stake in their community (if teachers are teaching not just for a paycheck but for the betterment of the lives of their kids), then they make a significant impact on local decision making.

The question here should be "How do these sets of photographs impact the teacher's ability to do her job well?" If this costs her respect in her schoool, if this impacts her ability to treat students fairly (because it impacts her ability to dispense discipline), if this impacts her ability to work with her colleagues on important distrcit and school initiatives, it seems reasonable for the district to conclude that she can't perform her job as she needs to.

Don't misread this. I'm pro-nudity, pro-teacher, pro-first ammendment, pro-employee's rights.

But I'm also pro-quality of education. Should this negatively impact her ability to produce learning, she should be relieved of her position.

According to her... she is being fired... from her myspace account that someone linked to earlier in the thread:

About me:
ARTIST AND ART Teacher (termination pending) at a high school in Austin, Texas . Looking for help with funding the gathering of evidence to defend myself against the Austin Independant School District. (both civil and criminal). They are firing me for pictures of me being on a website (celesta) and claiming the website is pornographic. The district isn't even asking to hear my side. At this time, I have been advised not to share too much information about my case. But as soon as I get the ok I will gladly share more of my story. PS: when you donate i will send you a one of a kind drawing/painting/little something something sweet ok?

[thedude110]

According to her... she is being fired... from her myspace account that someone linked to earlier in the thread:



Perhaps I should have been more clear.

She should not be fired for posing nude.

If one of the consequences of posing nude (one of the consequences of her free speech) is a decreased ability to provide a high quality of education to her students, then the district's priority should be to protect the students' right to learn, not the individual teacher's right to free speech.

My union wouldn't like to hear this, but I believe the right to education of the students as a whole is more important than any individual teacher's rights (within given limits, of course -- the teacher should be paid, for example!).

If it could be shown that the district consistently and willfully acted against the first ammendment rights of several teachers, that could change my opinion significantly.

[dornoforpyros]

I hope she wins, those were tastefully done and artist should never have to explain their work to ANYONE, especially close minded "family values" rednecks. :mad: :mad:

[Electro Funk]

Perhaps I should have been more clear.

She should not be fired for posing nude.

If one of the consequences of posing nude (one of the consequences of her free speech) is a decreased ability to provide a high quality of education to her students, then the district's priority should be to protect the students' right to learn, not the individual teacher's right to free speech.

My union wouldn't like to hear this, but I believe the right to education of the students as a whole is more important than any individual teacher's rights (within given limits, of course -- the teacher should be paid, for example!).

If it could be shown that the district consistently and willfully acted against the first ammendment rights of several teachers, that could change my opinion significantly.

actually you were pretty clear in your first thread, and i cant say i would disagree with you... i think you mentioned earlier if she was teaching college students it would be quite different and i would agree there as well... i actually meant to link to someones else's thread regarding "if she was getting fired", but accidentially linked to yours somehow:confused:
my bad... :o

[mmzplanet]

Freedom of Speech is exactly that. You can speak and get your point across freely, but other affiliated parties have freedoms of their own too.

I can freely flip off my boss....but he can freely fire me too.

With that said... I don't think that your off time should be controlled by your employer. If you want to post pics of yourself online...go ahead. I can also see the other sides argument that they dont want the negative attention directed at the business or school. You can also fault individual parents too. If they dont approve of their kids seeing that on the internet...they need to keep a closer eye on web habits. Its not up to the rest of us to uphold THEIR families values.

[Electro Funk]

I can freely flip off my boss....but he can freely fire me too.

God i wanted to do that on Friday, but held back for your exact reasoning :D

[DZ/015]

I wonder, does Texas still do the stocks, public flogging, dunking and burning at the stake? It's so hard to know which is the most appropriate Medieval punishment for the crime of being such a wanton floozie.

If they do, I'll be first in line to photograph it!

[aquajet]

An open question:

Would you be okay with your teenage child looking at nude photographs of his/her high school teacher?

[IJ Reilly]

An open question:

Would you be okay with your teenage child looking at nude photographs of his/her high school teacher?

I wouldn't be okay with my teenage child using the internet, watching TV, listening to the radio, or going to movies. As Kurt Vonnegut once wrote, eventually the First Amendment will have to be repealed, for the good of the childern.

Stop the world, I want to get off.

[Chip NoVaMac]

The only basis that I can find for the AISD in firing her is based on any "morals" clause that they may have in the contracts with the teachers.

While I defend anyones right to be themselves, if you sign a contract waiving those rights, then you should be prepared to pay the price. That is until SCOTUS says that "moral" clauses are unconstitutional. And that time will be a long time coming sadly.

[aquajet]

I wouldn't be okay with my teenage child using the internet, watching TV, listening to the radio, or going to movies. As Kurt Vonnegut once wrote, eventually the First Amendment will have to be repealed, for the good of the childern.

Stop the world, I want to get off.

I kind of suspected this sort of response would appear (and I'll be frank, especially from you :) ). You've guilefully evaded my question.

I can sympathize with both sides, but let's be fair here: there's a clear difference between whatever "immoral" things a child may come across on the internet or observe on television, radio or the movies and his discovery of nude photographs of his teacher. A teacher has a unique relationship with her adolescent student. How is this relationship affected by sharing nude photographs among one another? Is it reasonable to place certain constraints on a high school teacher's freedoms?

[DZ/015]

An open question:

Would you be okay with your teenage child looking at nude photographs of his/her high school teacher?

Absoutely not! Her conduct in this matter is beyond explanation. If she were teaching college, no problem. Primary school, no excuse for this.

[bigandy]

This would never happen in the UK.

Mostly because teachers here have generally hit every branch when falling from the ugly tree.

And nobody wants to see that. :eek:

[skunk]

Absoutely not! Her conduct in this matter is beyond explanation. If she were teaching college, no problem. Primary school, no excuse for this.Why would primary school children even be looking at nude photos on the net?:confused:

[skunk]

This would never happen in the UK.

Mostly because teachers here have generally hit every branch when falling from the ugly tree.

And nobody wants to see that. :eek:That's not very fair.

[link92]

So, nowadays, you can't pose for photography?

[Arnaud]

"Hey, you art teacher, we need you for our school. But do not try to be a free-minded artist in your own private life, we will tell you what is art and what is not."

I think this is ridiculous. She did not incite her pupils to go and see the pictures, did she ? She did not bring her photos to her class either, or did she ?

Sad for her, but I think she'll be better off in another school, where art teachers can hopefully do what they consider artistic in their private life.

[pedrov]

old saying call "straw that broke camels back"

think for minute... she is gay. or at least bi.

texas school district builds up info after info. they know she bi, but cant fire her for that. they get lucky when vinditive teacher shows link.

now they can fire the dyke!

i dont think this so muc about the nudes...

[jaxstate]

If she's doing this on her own time, so be it. Just becaue she feels this is art, doesn't mean she's teaching it to the kids.

[gekko513]

I looked at the pictures and I couldn't find one that was indecent. The one in the bathtub was cropped above her breasts, she was dressed for the ones on the bed, and the rest were a lot of more or less interesting pictures in different poses and settings. Some were quite good in my opinion. Even if she did show a nipple, I don't see the problem. There wasn't anything suggestive or pornographic about the pics I saw.

[Arnaud]

Next headlines:
-"Math teacher fired for walking naked in her house and being spotted by a pupil peeping through the window",
- "Language teacher fired for reading a newspaper with escort girls' ads in the last page, as evidenced after his trash was searched by pupils",
- "Biology teacher fired for watching soft-porn MTV clips on the cable, and having this information leaked to a pupil by his father who happens to be the cable man".

[Josh]

old saying call "straw that broke camels back"

think for minute... she is gay. or at least bi.

texas school district builds up info after info. they know she bi, but cant fire her for that. they get lucky when vinditive teacher shows link.

now they can fire the dyke!

i dont think this so muc about the nudes...

I agree totally.

[thedude110]

A teacher has a unique relationship with her adolescent student. How is this relationship affected by sharing nude photographs among one another? Is it reasonable to place certain constraints on a high school teacher's freedoms?

This is a question that a lot of high school teachers grapple with, I think. An example: I have a good friend who likes to wear T-Shirts adorned with witticisms -- "I'm a Vagitarian," for example. When she started teaching this year, she suddenly had to ask this question: Is it ok for me to wear these shirts to the mall? Where my students will see me? Will I lose respect in the eyes of my students? Will it impact my ability to do my job? To what degree do I want my sexuality to be a point of conversation amongst my students?

In turn, I would argue that a lot of this problem is rooted in a hyper-puritanical educational system that seems to demand that teachers treat their students with dishonesty (that you know who I am as a teacher, but not who I really am -- a problem that manifests itself when students don't think teachers are even real people, i.e. -- "You eat lunch, Mr.? Shouldn't you be grading or something?").

So, I guess my answer to your question is, no, we shouldn't limit teacher's freedoms -- we should instead seek more progressive pedagogy and administration. But as long as things are set up as they are -- well, teachers better understand the system and recognize that any act of publication -- from a poem to a t-shirt they're wearing -- serves as a way to judge their qualifications (and a teacher's qualifications, in the eyes of too many, doesn't go beyond a teacher's presumed character). This goes back to the fact that everyone thinks they can be a teacher and that, as capitalists, we're all pretty convinced we're disposable.

Now, should I, a high school teacher, have been "allowed" to publish the phrase "I'm a Vagitarian" to an internet message board? On school time no less?

Well, I don't think you know who I am, and I'm currently proctoring a final exam with four proctors and 9 students (the usual wonderful dispersal of resources in the public school systems of America), so I think so.

[Abstract]

Not porn .

You know this is a story from the US, in Europe they would not give a damn about a topless woman
or nudes that dont show anything .

Exactly what I was thinking --- this was definitely news from America. This is rated PG, at best. Anyone over the age of 13 should be able to see her photos.

Actually, a person at any age should be able to look at these photos. I don't see any nudity whatsoever after having quickly skimmed THIS (http://www.flickr.com/photos/celestadanger/tags/tamara/) account.....all 30 pages of her photographs. Can someone just tell us the page number it's on, because I honestly don't see her nude. :confused:

And if they want to hire an art teacher, don't they realize that she's gonna photograph and appear in photographs? If the photos weren't even nude, but were posted on a webpage where there WAS nudity, the teacher did nothing wrong, really.

[IJ Reilly]

I kind of suspected this sort of response would appear (and I'll be frank, especially from you :) ). You've guilefully evaded my question.

I can sympathize with both sides, but let's be fair here: there's a clear difference between whatever "immoral" things a child may come across on the internet or observe on television, radio or the movies and his discovery of nude photographs of his teacher. A teacher has a unique relationship with her adolescent student. How is this relationship affected by sharing nude photographs among one another? Is it reasonable to place certain constraints on a high school teacher's freedoms?

My answer was more direct than perhaps it appeared. My point is, if a parent is worried about their child seeing a nude photo of their teacher on the internet, they'd better unplug their household from it and just about every other form of media on the planet, because their children are bound to be exposed to far worse.

Everyone is in favor of "reasonable constraints," virtually by definition, and therein lay the problem. Nobody thinks the constraints they are trying to place on the personal lives of other people are unreasonable.

All of this makes me wonder if Michelangelo's models were shunned, if Ruben's paintings were banned. It makes me wonder about people I live amongst here in 2006 who'd turn the clock back, not just 100 years, not just 200 or 300 years, but to somewhere in the vicinity of the 14th century.

[aquajet]

I don't see any nudity whatsoever after having quickly skimmed THIS (http://www.flickr.com/photos/celestadanger/tags/tamara/) account.....all 30 pages of her photographs. Can someone just tell us the page number it's on, because I honestly don't see her nude. :confused:

I believe the original photos in question were deleted.

[aquajet]

My answer was more direct than perhaps it appeared. My point is, if a parent is worried about their child seeing a nude photo of their teacher on the internet, they'd better unplug their household from it and just about every other form of media on the planet, because their children are bound to be exposed to far worse.

Yeah, I got that part. But you still haven't answered my question. Nor have you addressed how a high school student's relationship among her teacher would be affected, either positively or negatively, by such photographs.

[IJ Reilly]

Yeah, I got that part. But you still haven't answered my question. Nor have you addressed how a high school student's relationship among her teacher would be affected, either positively or negatively, by such photographs.

That was my answer to all of your questions. It should be none of their bloody business. Just because some people decided to make it their business, doesn't mean they get to ruin this person's teaching career. I think it should be easy to see how easily this sort of thing can get out of control.

[aquajet]

That was my answer to all of your questions. It should be none of their bloody business. Just because some people decided to make it their business, doesn't mean they get to ruin this person's teaching career...

I'd still like to see a direct answer to my original open question. But I guess that's not going to happen. :confused:

My point being, nobody should expect complete, unfettered freedom of speech without consequences. You might think it's "none of their bloody business," but if a teenager happens upon his teacher's website with nude, publicly posted photographs and there are detrimental consequences to the relationship between student and teacher, we should examine if a teacher's right to post nude pictures of herself should trump a student's right to education. I see it as a "your rights end where mine begin" sort of thing.

[Josh]

I'd still like to see a direct answer to my original open question. But I guess that's not going to happen. :confused:

My point being, nobody should expect complete, unfettered freedom of speech without consequences. You might think it's "none of their bloody business," but if a teenager happens upon his teacher's website with nude, publicly posted photographs and there are detrimental consequences to the relationship between student and teacher, we should examine if a teacher's right to post nude pictures of herself should trump a student's right to education. I see it as a "your rights end where mine begin" sort of thing.

What I don't see is how finding a teacher's nude photos would "trump a student's [right to] education?"

What a teacher does privately and legally, in his/her own time is absolutely zero grounds for termination. Regardless of what puritan family feels it is not right.

If parents don't want their kids seeing certain things online, that is the parents' job to monitor what their children do - it isnt' anyone else job to avoid (legal, mind you) behaviors that reflect that.

If coming across personal photos of a teacher affects the relationship between that student and the teacher, that is the student and his/her parents' fault. Not being mature enough to realize that teacher's are real people that don't sleep in their desks is part of learning reality, which all chidren should be part of.

[Gasu E.]

"Whodja have for Art?"

"Miss Hooter heeheeheeheehee"

[Arnaud]

My point being, nobody should expect complete, unfettered freedom of speech without consequences. You might think it's "none of their bloody business," but if a teenager happens upon his teacher's website with nude, publicly posted photographs and there are detrimental consequences to the relationship between student and teacher, we should examine if a teacher's right to post nude pictures of herself should trump a student's right to education. I see it as a "your rights end where mine begin" sort of thing.

I see your point of view as a scary one. You tend to say that a teacher's private life goes after a pupil's life, because of all the possible consequences, and that all the actions of the teacher should be controlled in that view. On the other hand, the pupil does not have any of these obligations in his own life. I.e., the teacher becomes a slave of the pupil. Poor gratification for such a comitment.

I think on the other hand that the pupil should know that the teacher is a human being, and that there's a line between teacher at school and teacher home. That would be healthy for the kid.

[IJ Reilly]

I'd still like to see a direct answer to my original open question. But I guess that's not going to happen. :confused:

Like it or not, it was a direct answer. It's not the school board's job to ensure that every student is protected from every possible thing that every possible parent might believe to be inappropriate. It would not be their job, even if they could do it.

[aquajet]

I see your point of view as a scary one. You tend to say that a teacher's private life goes after a pupil's life, because of all the possible consequences, and that all the actions of the teacher should be controlled in that view. On the other hand, the pupil does not have any of these obligations in his own life. I.e., the teacher becomes a slave of the pupil. Poor gratification for such a comitment.

*sigh* Look, read my posts. What I'm saying is that we need to examine these questions before blindly granting someone freedoms to do whatever they want without consequences. That doesn't imply we should strip a teacher of all rights. I don't know how you could possibly arrive at that conclusion. We're discussing a very specific instance here. Please don't twist my comments into things they aren't.

[aquajet]

Like it or not, it was a direct answer.

No, it's not.

Would you be okay with your teenage child looking at nude photographs of his/her high school teacher?

Yes or no. My guess is you won't answer.

It's not the school board's job to ensure that every student is protected from every possible thing that every possible parent might believe to be inappropriate. It would not be their job, even if they could do it.

I understand your point, and for the most part, agree with you. Let's say a large majority of parents feel something is inappropriate (anything at all, you think of something). Would it still be wrong to terminate a teacher's employment? Is there room for any sort of compromise?

[emw]

Like it or not, when we take a job - just about any job - we take it with the understanding that we may need to sacrifice some amount of personal liberty to remain employed or to remain effective in our jobs. Teaching is no different, though I think it's more of a hot-button because it involves both "children" and the government.

Regardless of the intent this teacher may have had when she posted nude photographs of herself on the web, it probably would have been reasonable to assume that her students could happen across them - after all, they weren't on a "adult" site, that I know of - they were on myspace and/or flickr, both of which are readily and legally available to those who are under the age of consent. And if she really thought about it, she probably could have determined that someone would have seen them, would have gotten pissed about it, and she would end up in the situation in which she now finds herself. Was it illegal? No. Was it immoral? Not in my opinion. Was it poor judgement? Probably.

So the question becomes why did she do it? Perhaps all along she was wanting to make a statement - that the school board wouldn't dictate what she could or could not do.

Personally, I have no issue with the pictures (surprise, surprise), and additionally, I'd have no problem with my children seeing them. Nudity isn't bad. Nudity is natural. If someone loses respect or effectiveness solely because they're seen naked, they probably didn't have it to begin with.

[IJ Reilly]

Yes or no. My guess is you won't answer.

Good grief, no need to be antagonistic.

I thought I was being perfectly clear about this, but I guess not. No, I am not bothered by this in any way which would require a school board to dismiss a teacher over it. And once again, so there's no mistake about what I'm saying, if a parent is concerned about what their child may see on the internet, then they, not the school board, and not the teacher, must take responsibility to ensure that they don't see it.

[xsedrinam]

This would never happen in the UK.

Mostly because teachers here have generally hit every branch when falling from the ugly tree.

And nobody wants to see that. :eek:
Thank for the much needed laugh, bigandy. :D
Good to know you've kept abreast of things.

[aquajet]

Good grief, no need to be antagonistic.

I just wanted a straight answer, which I didn't feel you were giving, and which doesn't really have anything to do with a school board. Sorry for any offense.

[skunk]

Personally, I have no issue with the pictures (surprise, surprise), and additionally, I'd have no problem with my children seeing them. Nudity isn't bad. Nudity is natural. If someone loses respect or effectiveness solely because they're seen naked, they probably didn't have it to begin with.I second that.

[IJ Reilly]

Thank for the much needed laugh, bigandy. :D
Good to know you've kept abreast of things.

No nudes is good nudes?

[xsedrinam]

No nudes is good nudes?
Only when they call her buff.

[IJ Reilly]

Only when they call her buff.

I think you may be ask skin too much.

[Electro Funk]

I think you may be ask skin too much.

lol... nice play on words... gave me a chuckle...:D

[Arnaud]

*sigh* Look, read my posts. What I'm saying is that we need to examine these questions before blindly granting someone freedoms to do whatever they want without consequences. That doesn't imply we should strip a teacher of all rights. I don't know how you could possibly arrive at that conclusion. We're discussing a very specific instance here. Please don't twist my comments into things they aren't.

Well, I did read your posts, and I'm still considering the "very specific instance". We do have all the facts in that case, we're not acting blindly.

As an individual, you are certainly entitled to write a book and publish it, with your own opinions, without your employer firing you - unless there was a clause in your contract (for not mentioning your field of work, for example) or you clearly attack your employer (for possible diffamation) -. You could also paint, take photos, sculpt, or express yourself in any other artistic manner, even posing naked if it suits you.

Now this teacher is an art teacher, I suspect she has a feeling for artistic expressions of her own (i.e., whether you agree with her style or not), but you've been repeating she should not express herself because of the possible "detrimental consequences" that you haven't been able to clearly explain.

When it comes to the relationship between teacher and student, it is clear that the teachers have to show an example in the school, and have to restrain themselves from inciting the students to immoral behaviour. Now, she hasn't done any of that.

It's not either as if she'd done immoral things, like child porn or incitation to violence. You see worse things anytime you switch the tv on, browse through a magazine or see ads in the street. Just google around for David La Chapelle, or any rapper's video, and then you tell me if what she does is worse, and worth the trouble. (NB: I do like some of the works of La Chapelle, I just say that they are not for kids).

We've obviously different opinions on the subject, and a different perception of the problem itself.

[emw]

lol... nice play on words... gave me a chuckle...:D
Don't encourage him - if it keeps up, this thread will be clothed.

[aquajet]

Don't encourage him...

Who exactly are you dressing?

[Electro Funk]

Don't encourage him - if it keeps up, this thread will be clothed.

for real? for a comment like that :confused:

if you are serious then i do apologize and will not feed the monkeys... :D


Edit... HAHAHAHAHAHAHA.... just realized you said clothed instead of closed....

you guys crack me up!!! :D

[aquajet]

We do have all the facts in that case, we're not acting blindly.

Well, actually, we don't have all the details. That's why I'm not really advocating any specific action, if any is really needed. I don't know. Just playing devil's advocate I guess.

As for Dave Chappelle, I think he's a comedic genius. :)

[emw]

When it comes to the relationship between teacher and student, it is clear that the teachers have to show an example in the schoolUnfortunately for all of us, the separation of job life and personal life isn't as simple as the ringing of the bell or the punching of the time clock. You are always representing yourself when you do things, and when your effectiveness depends on how others perceive you, then what you do outside of "company time" can indeed have an impact on job performance.

and have to restrain themselves from inciting the students to immoral behaviour. Now, she hasn't done any of that.Depends on whose definition of "immoral" you use, which is the problem here.

[IJ Reilly]

Don't encourage him - if it keeps up, this thread will be clothed.

Darn, collared again!

[Arnaud]

Depends on whose definition of "immoral" you use, which is the problem here.

I meant, she didn't invite students to check her website or pose for photos like hers (from what I read). I understand that she did her own things on her side, and that it came back to her unexpectedly.

[Boggle]

Darn, collared again!

that's what happens when you are chaste.

[Frozone]

An open question:

Would you be okay with your teenage child looking at nude photographs of his/her high school teacher?

I'm only 18, so as of yet...no kids. But, if I did have kids (and someday will), they would not be raised in a house where nudity is some taboo subject. Chances are, most teenagers and even some pre-teenagers have already seen nudity in much more graphic and "obscene" sense than this, and probably see it on a regular basis.

But then again, my kids most likely won't be attending traditional public school education, soo.

[Maxiseller]

I'm one for thinking that you are representing not the school, but yourself when you teach.

I am a private music tutor, and am always very concious that when I step outside I could (and have many, many times) bump into one of my students and their parents.

It would not be desirable therefore if I was, perchance nude, smoking pot etc etc.

I stand up every day in a position of respect (that is, I expect it) and you can't possibly throw away every veil of decency and personal space if you're hoping to make a sucessful career as an educator.

I do believe that everybody is entitled to doing what they want in their personal time - but this "public" image comes with the job if you're dedicated. I guess I am!

[CorvusCamenarum]

I meant, she didn't invite students to check her website or pose for photos like hers (from what I read). I understand that she did her own things on her side, and that it came back to her unexpectedly.

Was it not another teacher who actually directed the students to the website in question in the process of badmouthing her to students of his own? Should not be be disciplined for being the orignal exposer as it were?

I looked at the photos and I didn't see anything wrong with them, but that's just me. I don't know that I'd classify them as "art" per se, but I'm not an artist so don't listen to me on that.

That being said, I find it absurd that she could/would be dismissed for practicing her profession. Where would it end? Could a writing teacher be dismissed for having a "morally questionable" story published? Caution: slippery slope ahead.

[displaced]

The question I'd like to know the answer to is:

Was she given the chance to continue teaching? If so, how did she handle any student awareness of the pictures?

There's plenty of teachers who could handle this. If she has the respect of the students because of how she teaches, that's unlikely to change due to the pictures.

If this adversely (and importantly, materially) affected her ability to teach, then perhaps the school authorities have a right to ask her to leave. Otherwise, they should leave her the hell alone.

Basically, if she was no longer able to fulfil her role at the school -- that's a problem. The fact that these photos exist is not.

(and for the poster who said most UK teachers had hit every branch of the ugly tree... well, you should've been at my school. I had an English teacher for my A-Levels (17-18yrs old, pre-uni qualifications, for non UK'ers) who was a) stunning, b) incredibly sexy (you know what I mean... the kind of person who just *is* sexy, irrespective of appearance) and c) the best damn teacher I ever had. Her knowledge, enthusiasm, understanding and teaching ability are nothing short of phenomenal. Now I'm a decade or so older, we're actually still friends. I've sometimes reminded her of points a, b and c above. She usually just smiles and says "It was all part of the plan." :D)

[IJ Reilly]

that's what happens when you are chaste.

No shirt!

[thedude110]

The question I'd like to know the answer to is:

Was she given the chance to continue teaching? If so, how did she handle any student awareness of the pictures?

There's plenty of teachers who could handle this. If she has the respect of the students because of how she teaches, that's unlikely to change due to the pictures.

If this adversely (and importantly, materially) affected her ability to teach, then perhaps the school authorities have a right to ask her to leave. Otherwise, they should leave her the hell alone.

Basically, if she was no longer able to fulfil her role at the school -- that's a problem. The fact that these photos exist is not.


Precisely the point -- this argument should be about how the consequences of her decision impact her instruction. Everything else is secondary.

I see your point of view as a scary one. You tend to say that a teacher's private life goes after a pupil's life, because of all the possible consequences, and that all the actions of the teacher should be controlled in that view. On the other hand, the pupil does not have any of these obligations in his own life. I.e., the teacher becomes a slave of the pupil. Poor gratification for such a comitment.

Welcome to an ethical relationship.

"Everyone is respnosible for the criminal's actions, and no one more so than myself."

[xsedrinam]

No shirt!
Just sleeve it alone.

[Mac_Freak]

..I do like some of the works of La Chapelle, I just say that they are not for kids

...
As for Dave Chappelle, I think he's a comedic genius. :)


Arnaud was reffering to David LaChapelle (http://www.davidlachapelle.com/) the photographer, not Dave Chappelle the comic.

[vniow]

Arnaud was reffering to David LaChapelle (http://www.davidlachapelle.com/) the photographer, not Dave Chappelle the comic.

Wow.

Those are fabulous.

[IJ Reilly]

Just sleeve it alone.

Okay, I'll button it, before I blouse it all up.

[aquajet]

Arnaud was reffering to David LaChapelle (http://www.davidlachapelle.com/) the photographer, not Dave Chappelle the comic.

Ahh, thanks for clearing that up. Very cool. :)

Didn't even notice the 'La'.