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
The gutting of Voice of America (VOA) and Radio Free Asia (RFA) by US President Donald Trump’s administration poses a serious threat to the global voice of freedom, particularly for those living under authoritarian regimes such as China. The US — hailed as the model of liberal democracy — has the moral responsibility to uphold the values it champions. In undermining these institutions, the US risks diminishing its “soft power,” a pivotal pillar of its global influence. VOA Tibetan and RFA Tibetan played an enormous role in promoting the strong image of the US in and outside Tibet. On VOA Tibetan,
Sung Chien-liang (宋建樑), the leader of the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) efforts to recall Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) Legislator Lee Kun-cheng (李坤城), caused a national outrage and drew diplomatic condemnation on Tuesday after he arrived at the New Taipei City District Prosecutors’ Office dressed in a Nazi uniform. Sung performed a Nazi salute and carried a copy of Adolf Hitler’s Mein Kampf as he arrived to be questioned over allegations of signature forgery in the recall petition. The KMT’s response to the incident has shown a striking lack of contrition and decency. Rather than apologizing and distancing itself from Sung’s actions,
US President Trump weighed into the state of America’s semiconductor manufacturing when he declared, “They [Taiwan] stole it from us. They took it from us, and I don’t blame them. I give them credit.” At a prior White House event President Trump hosted TSMC chairman C.C. Wei (魏哲家), head of the world’s largest and most advanced chip manufacturer, to announce a commitment to invest US$100 billion in America. The president then shifted his previously critical rhetoric on Taiwan and put off tariffs on its chips. Now we learn that the Trump Administration is conducting a “trade investigation” on semiconductors which
By now, most of Taiwan has heard Taipei Mayor Chiang Wan-an’s (蔣萬安) threats to initiate a vote of no confidence against the Cabinet. His rationale is that the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP)-led government’s investigation into alleged signature forgery in the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) recall campaign constitutes “political persecution.” I sincerely hope he goes through with it. The opposition currently holds a majority in the Legislative Yuan, so the initiation of a no-confidence motion and its passage should be entirely within reach. If Chiang truly believes that the government is overreaching, abusing its power and targeting political opponents — then
RSS