Female student explicitly demands to "grasp the teacher's student position": a teacher in Guangzhou was suspended, the police filed a case investigation

A female student in WeChat explicitly told the teacher: "Privately, I do not want to have any more talk, separate contact", and asked the other "to grasp the teacher's student's relationship".

On the 20th of September, the major counties announced the latest progress in handling the case: the teachers involved have been suspended, the public security department has filed a case investigation, and mentally-health teachers are arranged to evacuate students at the same time. Previously, the major counties education bureau, the public security organs and the disciplinary committee have intervened. Compared to what the school party initially called "displacement positions" on September 19, "displacement + filing" means that the incident has entered the formal investigation procedure from the personnel disposal within the school.

Public chat screenshots show that the teachers involved sent information to the female students, such as “I never stopped loving you,” “In my heart, you are my loved one,” “I’d like to go to your house to play.” Student responses were not vague, but cleared the boundaries several times. This determined the nature of the event can not simply be classified as “teacher’s student miscommunication”: when the student has clearly refused to continue private contact, whether the teacher continues to send information beyond the teaching relationship, is the core fact that the investigation must answer.

After receiving feedback from netizens on September 18, the county government's organized education, public security and other departments investigated and confirmed that Mr. Ma had sent "inappropriate information" to a female student via WeChat. Officials currently use "inappropriate information" and "inappropriate information" and other expressions, public security organs have filed the case.

This event is worth continuing to ask, not just what punishment a person will be subjected to. For a secondary school, there is a natural power difference between teachers and minors or young students: teachers are in possession of assessments, classroom management, upgrading advice and daily contact opportunities, and even students are uncomfortable and may fear that rejection will affect campus life. Therefore, the school's responsibility for protection cannot wait until the chat screens are uploaded to the network.

The current public information has not delivered several key questions: whether the school has previously received feedback from the students, parents or other teachers; the teachers involved have been "displaced" before or after the public opinion exposure; whether the school has established a clear boundary for the private communication between teachers and students; whether other students have encountered similar situations; whether the educational authorities have previously recorded the teacher's complaints.

On September 19th, when the media questioned the school, the information received was that the teachers involved were already “not in school and displaced”; on the evening of the 19th, the county-level notification, the disposal was upgraded to a suspension, and the public security organs filed a case. This change showed that network exposure and interdepartmental intervention pushed the case from internal processing to public procedure. But if the school had already had a clear student rejection record when the situation was first mastered, then why did not the first time take isolation contact, investigation for evidence and psychological support, the same needs to be explained.

Teachers' professional norms do not only require "no criminal crimes". the Ministry of education will maintain appropriate relationships with students, protect the student's personal dignity and physical and psychological safety and integrate the Teacher's legal responsibilities and Teacher's responsibilities are not only two options: even if the final behavior does not meet the criminal standards, the Teacher's student relationship is repeatedly used to express personal emotions, ignoring the student's explicit rejection, it can also affect professional discipline and school management responsibilities.

From the perspective of governance, this kind of campus event is the real test is "students say no what happens after". an effective campus protection mechanism, should allow students to safely complain, let the school immediately reduce potential risk exposure, let the evidence be preserved, let parents get clear procedures and by education, public security and other departments according to their respective powers, rather than push students to the place where they must rely on social media public chat records in exchange for response.

In the next phase, more important than the overall promise is the conclusion of public investigation: what acts were implemented in particular, when the school was first informed, what measures were initially taken, whether the relevant officials fulfilled the duties of student protection, and how in the future to establish a complaint and early warning mechanism that can be really used by students.

This is also the part of the case that is most worthy of continuous follow-up. punishing a teacher can end a case; only answering why the school has failed to prevent the risk from continuing before, and why students need to push through network exposure to process, can determine whether the campus protection system is really changing.