Nebraska teacher suspended for showing beheading video
 

Link

Well, I'm not sure how I feel about this. On one hand, I've seen the video...and wished that I had not. On the other hand, these kids are old enough to decide for themselves whether, or not, to view it. I guess in the end, I have to agree with Julie Creel...if the kid's old enough to be over there, then the kid's old enough to see life's horrors.

The kids are able to choose if they want to see it or not. it's not any different than us disecting a pig in sixth grade. (the choice part). we could leave, or do it. whichever we see fit. no penalties against either decision.

he should not be suspended or fired.

1. They weren't forced/required to watch the video.
2. It's readily available on the internet anyhow.
3. I agree completely with the parent about the students being old enough to fight, and old enough to see what's going on in Iraq.

That said, the teacher did display poor judgment - he probably should have consulted with administration first and notified parents that he was going to show the video, included justification of why he thought it was relevant to the class, and given parents an option to request that their kids not watch it. It is graphic, and they should have at least been warned.

I was the first to answer "let me think about it" only because with the way the question was presented, "Should a teacher be suspended for showing students the beheading video?" it leaves it open for students of all ages. I believe that if a teacher in a elementary school, or even a middle school showed this to their students, it would be very innapropriate. But I believe that in this situation, this teacher was not in the wrong.

I saw black and white movies of the horrors of the Nazi concentration camps in school when I was 13.

No, I don't think this is too much; this is the REALITY of what we face.

Couldn't have said it better myself.

I'm going to go against the flow. First I have to say that yes, they should be allowed to watch the video. As long as it's on their own time. I simply can't see how anyone would think it's appropriate to load up a video of someones head getting removed in the middle of class.

If he took lurkette's approach, and got permission/notified the parents then I would not have a problem with it. But still, what good does it serve to watch the video?

In THEORY, I think it was ok, but consider this:

If, in a movie, they had shown an actual clip on someone being beheaded, it would certainly have garnered an NC-17 rating. While the majority of high-school seniors are 17 and older, a few are not (I was 16 and a senior). Therefore, it's the moral equivalent of showing a rated R movie to a 8th grade class, but giving the kids the option of watching or not.

Still, if you don't have a stick up your behind about these technicalities, I thinki it's ok. seniors ought to be old enough to make that kind of decision. Watching it certainly would make kids more concerned about american history and what's going on in the world.

The things these kids do in their free time is worse than anything they could see in a video, probably. Censorship is a feeble attempt to make minors believe what we want them too about the world. It's a violent and cruel place out there. It's better to find out from a video than firsthand. The teacher did nothing wrong.

Showing the video also shapes how they view the world. It works both ways. It would be intresting to see the context in which the teacher showed the video. What I mean is, if the students had to write about it, if it was an experiment of their reaction, was shown as a discussion item, or if the teacher just did it to scare the hell out of them.

Exactly what I was thinking. They started us on a Holocaust unit in 6th grade, so that's when I was (iirc) 11-12.

The students can find the video just about anywhere anyway, this is just cutting out the middleman. If the students wanted to see it on the internet they'd have downloaded it. If they wanted to see it in class, they'd have opted into it.

I think the teacher perhaps had poor judgement for stepping outside the curriculum with anything unapproved, they're very stringent about that in places. But aside from that, I see nothing wrong with his actions and I think the suspension is overblown.

I don't think that's justification for the teacher to show it (though I do think that it is okay that the teacher showed it), but I still agree with all the points you made except for one thing: it's not fair to categorize "these kids" as being your average teens who do worse things than beheading the innocent.

If it was something they had to write about afterwards, then the teacher almost forced them to watch it. Grades can make some students do anything.

The schools in this country are a mass of contradictions and an unreality show. Things that happen there - or do not happen there - are arbitrary and irrational. They are a vast wasteland of insignificant experience. They are unimprovable and hopeless, gutless and spiritless places where actual education is only an occasional and incidental by-product of what occurs within their institutionalized shells.

Works for me too.

I'd say I agree with Lurkette, he should have warned parents first, but I don't believe suspending him will help the school in any way.

I actually voted yes. Why? Well a few people already mentioned some of my points being that perhaps some of the viewers were under 18 - thus should have required a parental permission to watch "NC-17" material. However, my big point supporting his suspension is that he did it on school time. I don't believe this material should be shown in high school class. Had he shown it after or before school, I don't think I would have supported his suspension. By showing the video on school time he was basically implying he had the administration's approval to show it - which is the main reason, I believe, he got in trouble.

I'm one of the few that voted yes. I think it would have been okay to tell his students where to find it on the net; but there is too much peer pressure to stay, even if one didn't truly want to view the beheading.

All your arguments to not suspend make sense. My main point, however, is that this should have been left up to the parents to decide and it wasn't. Something like this can open "Pandora's box" if not addressed.

I don't understand what viewing a beheading is supposed to "teach". I'm not going to download the video and see it for myself since I think that's one thing in life I can live without seeing.

No!

It's a teacher's job to teach reading, writing, math, etc., not be a replacement for a parent.

Then more parents should accept the responsibilty of raising their children. But that could be a whole other post.

Instead I'll argue that the sociology and history teacher was better able to explain to those who chose to see the video what they had just seen than most of the parents would have. Instead too many kids have gone home to view the video on the 'net as entertainment rather than understanding what an act of violence this was.

To the people who said its not appropriate for school, the guy teaches history and sociology, he could have had a good reason to show the video, depending on what he was teaching. The war in Iraq is a huge issue right now, and this video has been a big deal on the news latetly.

I was taking an American history class when 9/11 happend, we stopped the decade we were learning about and started lessons about al qaeda and Osama Bin Laden for a few weeks because obviously 9/11 will go down in the history books.

My point is unless we know the context in which the video was shown we shouldn't judge whether is was appropriate or not to show the video.

I take a very simplistic view to the viewing of this video. We are empowering the people who did the act. By watching the video we are viewing a horror that was filmed for propaganda purposes. I don't want to see this unfortunate lose his life and i believe that it would be rendered powerless by our not watching it. Mr. Berg deserves more respect than we are giving him by watching his grisly death.

my $.02

I think the teacher was well within his limits to show the video. In fact, on some level, I believe that if he really valued his students he was obligated to screen the video.

Why?

What ART said, I tend to believe is at least half-way correct; I'm not so long out of high-school to not remember how arbitrary and unnecessary half the material taught was.
The video of Nick Berg's execution, however, has some real value, both in morality (which is the purview and responsibility of every teacher) and history/sociology. For example, if he was discussing the means to fight a guerilla war, this is certainly one of them. Guerilla war depends on instilling doubt and fear, and dissolving the opponents will to fight (morale), and the execution certainly does that. Moreover, if he was discussing with his class how propoganda doesn't match up with the reality of the situation, this would be a good way to show how the news reports we hear dehumanize the events and distance the audience; the execution tape certainly slams home the human emotions of pity, sympathy, and moral disgust.

Just some thoughts.

*EDIT*
neddy65, I couldn't disagree more. This event should be powerful. I don't think anything could be more affective in dispelling the illusions some segments of the general population have that perpetuate war-mongering. We need to know what happens over there, even the stuff that doesn't sit well with us. Information is always power; you just might disagree with the logical conclusions that having this information engenders...

The article said that the teacher didn't force the student to watch the video. If any student who objects to watching a beheading video could simply have left the room and return until the clip was over.

I agree with some of the poster's opinion and comparsion to the Holocaust.

The beheading video is one of the bigger issues in iraq.

I don't disagree with the power of the video and any messages it may carry. I don't think we should pander to the people who shot it nor the reasons for it. We dehumanize Nick Berg by making him a media point and not an unfortunate man caught up in an unfortunate situation. He didn't die for a cause, he died in a fucked up game of " Oh Yeah?"

If they're under 18, get the parents permission. If they're over 18, free game. If you're legally an adult, you watch whatever the hell you want to. I think this one should have been a clear cut issue.

Let those who want to see it, see it. Those who don't, don't force them. But I would want my kids to see it. (At a reasonable age, of course, nothing absurd.)

Although I was disgusted by it, i watched it, because i felt a moral obligation to watch the repercussions of our actions within the world, and just as a testament to the world scope these days.

The Teacher used poor judgement.There was really no reason to show it and waste time doing it. If the kids wanted to see it they could look at it at home on their own time.

I'll keep it very simple and say I voted YES because I think the teacher showed (an almost reckless level) of very very
Poor Judgment.

Teachers are meant to be educators leading our children into the future. When a teacher can't even have enough forethought to recognize the ramifications of his actions, he is a jackass who shouldn't be teaching, plain and simple.

There's tons of ways he could have done it better, and perhaps I may have even supported him in that case -- but that's beyond the scope of what I'm trying to say.