Bounded

Dean Dad has a good post up about "boundaries" and blogging--where does one draw the professional line? My own rules have always gone as follows:

1.  No references (other than positive ones) to colleagues, administrators, etc.  If I've got a problem with someone (which I almost never do--it takes a lot to get me riled...), then I need to take it up with said someone in person, not on a blog. 

2.  All references to students must be generalized as far as possible.  If I complain about an error or oddity, it's because a lot of students committed the same error or generated the same oddity.  (Even the Titus Andronicus outburst mentioned below involved more than one person.)

3.  No discussion of confidential matters.  Individual plagiarism cases, problems with graduate students, etc., are all off the table.  So are specifics of job searches, departmental bureaucracy, and the like. 

Comments

[Addy N.]

Hi LP:
I'm quite intrigued about this topic going around. Do you think your rules would be different if you blogged anonymously?

[Jonathan Dresner]

Nice basic guidelines. I think there could be a little more wiggle room on discussing cases, perhaps (not confidential matters, and students would need to be anonymized carefully), but it's a start.

[Miriam]

Addy: I don't think my rules would be much different. I tend to agree with those who argue that we are all a lot less pseudonymous/anonymous than we like to think.

Jonathan: It depends on the kinds of cases, I think. I've never blogged about any of the more...interesting...experiences I've had as a graduate coordinator, because there was Just No Way to conceal the students' identities.