During a recent staff meeting at school, some teachers proposed installing surveillance cameras in every classroom on the campus to address a recent incident. Some students had written offensive words on the blackboard to insult the teachers, and no one admitted to guilt. There was no way to find out who the culprits were.
Some teachers said installing security cameras could deter students from engaging in inappropriate behavior. They believe that in cases of property loss, students obstructing classroom discipline, bullying and contravention of the Gender Equity Education Act (性別平等教育法), surveillance footage would reveal the truth.
If it is really that beneficial, it is perhaps curious that there is not even a single classroom with a security camera installed, with the exception of kindergartens.
Ministry of Education regulations on surveillance cameras in schools say that to maintain campus safety and to safeguard personal privacy, surveillance cameras are mainly installed at campus entrances and exits, corridors, stairway corners and walkway corners.
There are no surveillance cameras in restrooms even though they are black spots for school accidents. One notorious example happened in 2000, when a 15-year-old boy, Yeh Yung-chih (葉永鋕), who had been bullied for years due to his alleged effeminate behavior, died in the school toilet, where the bullies had attacked him.
However, installing surveillance cameras in school washrooms would infringe on students’ personal privacy. Therefore, security cameras could only be installed at the entrance of a restroom, but never inside.
Those who support installing security cameras in classrooms might say that teachers and students who are opposed to the idea have a guilty conscience — they are afraid that their inappropriate behavior would be exposed.
If that argument is valid, then the same reasoning could apply to installing surveillance cameras pointed at teachers’ desks. If teachers do not loaf around, why would they be afraid of being watched by a security camera?
We should all be sympathetic regarding the privacy issue. When you browse the Internet, you would not want other people to stare at your computer screen to see what you are looking at even if it is not a questionable Web site. There is, after all, a reasonable expectation of privacy.
When teachers are not teaching classes, they should be able to feel at ease in the office. Stretching their feet when the weather is hot, picking their noses or scratching an itch are no big deal, but what if you have a surveillance camera pointed at you? How would you feel? Would you still be able to relax? People should be able to have a reasonable expectation of privacy even in public venues.
There are pros and cons of installing surveillance cameras in classrooms. Taking protecting personal privacy into consideration, it should not be done hastily, especially since no consensus has been reached and parents have not given their consent.
Protecting teachers and students is just a sugarcoated excuse to install surveillance cameras and cover up the malicious intention of infringing on others’ privacy.
Lin Cheng-wu is a junior-high school teacher.
Translated by Fion Khan
A high-school student surnamed Yang (楊) gained admissions to several prestigious medical schools recently. However, when Yang shared his “learning portfolio” on social media, he was caught exaggerating and even falsifying content, and his admissions were revoked. Now he has to take the “advanced subjects test” scheduled for next month. With his outstanding performance in the general scholastic ability test (GSAT), Yang successfully gained admissions to five prestigious medical schools. However, his university dreams have now been frustrated by the “flaws” in his learning portfolio. This is a wake-up call not only for students, but also teachers. Yang did make a big
As former president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) concludes his fourth visit to China since leaving office, Taiwan finds itself once again trapped in a familiar cycle of political theater. The Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) has criticized Ma’s participation in the Straits Forum as “dancing with Beijing,” while the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) defends it as an act of constitutional diplomacy. Both sides miss a crucial point: The real question is not whether Ma’s visit helps or hurts Taiwan — it is why Taiwan lacks a sophisticated, multi-track approach to one of the most complex geopolitical relationships in the world. The disagreement reduces Taiwan’s
Former president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) is visiting China, where he is addressed in a few ways, but never as a former president. On Sunday, he attended the Straits Forum in Xiamen, not as a former president of Taiwan, but as a former Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) chairman. There, he met with Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference Chairman Wang Huning (王滬寧). Presumably, Wang at least would have been aware that Ma had once been president, and yet he did not mention that fact, referring to him only as “Mr Ma Ying-jeou.” Perhaps the apparent oversight was not intended to convey a lack of
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) last week announced that the KMT was launching “Operation Patriot” in response to an unprecedented massive campaign to recall 31 KMT legislators. However, his action has also raised questions and doubts: Are these so-called “patriots” pledging allegiance to the country or to the party? While all KMT-proposed campaigns to recall Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) lawmakers have failed, and a growing number of local KMT chapter personnel have been indicted for allegedly forging petition signatures, media reports said that at least 26 recall motions against KMT legislators have passed the second signature threshold
RSS