Dangerously Irrelevant

Should Orange County (FL) Public Schools have a social media policy for educators?

[This is the text of an e-mail I just sent the 7 board members for the Orange County (FL) Public Schools.]

Dear OCPS School Board members,

Greetings from the freezing state of Iowa!

I read with interest the recent Orlando Sentinel article on educators, students, and social media. Before you forge ahead with any policies that target any specific technologies (whether they be cell phones, messaging formats, or online social media tools), I would encourage you to read my short blog post on this:

• No Facebook for you!

The key point of the post is that tools and technologies both change and actually are irrelevant to the underlying issue of inappropriate teacher behavior. If you feel as a board that your existing policies are insufficient (and I would be surprised if what you need already isn't in place), I hope that at least you will not frame them in terms of specific technologies (per my reasoning in the blog post).

I would be happy to discuss this with some or all of you if so desired. All my best.

The zealous monitoring of students and teachers continues

In October 2007 I wrote:

[M]any administrators dispense with students' 4th Amendment rights in the name of 'safety.' They know what the law says, but community pressures or perceived dangers outweigh Constitutional rights. Many of these administrators are in schools with no history of violence or threats. But Columbine freaked everyone out - if it could happen there, it could happen anywhere - so anything goes when it comes to student rights.

The zealous electronic monitoring of P-12 students and teachers continues. Some is legal, some is not. The use of webcams to monitor students at home without their or their parents’ knowledge is likely illegal. The use of Web monitoring and/or keylogging software to keep track of teachers’ online usage is likely legal, although it fosters a culture of employee distrust. Complicating all of this is school organizations’ obligation to ensure environments free of bullying and sexual harassment.

Too many administrators – driven by spurious media reports, parent anxiety, desires for control and order, and a natural tendency to avoid controversy and cover their asses bases – are all too willing to sacrifice educational opportunities and/or essential liberties in the name of ‘safety.’ Of course we pay a cost for this, one that isn’t discussed nearly enough.

It is unclear at what point we will say, “Enough!” Right now the end to this is nowhere in sight. I’m afraid we’re going to look back one day and ask, “What have we done to ourselves in the name of safety?”

Related posts

• Surveillance society, safe schools
• Cell phone cameras in the K-12 classroom: Punishable offenses or student-citizen journalism?
• Classroom cameras
• Agreement and trust

Your technology coordinator works for you, not the other way around

A conversation I had with a superintendent at Nebraska’s first-ever Educational Administrators Technology Conference…

Superintendent: I’m new to my district. I spent the first year getting the lay of the land. I’m now ready to start making things happen when it comes to technology and our students but our technology coordinator is blocking me at every turn.

Me: You know, your technology coordinator works for you, not the other way around.

Superintendent: I know. We’re having those conversations but it’s difficult.

Me: Can’t you just say ‘Look, it’s a digital age and we need to be facilitating technology-rich learning experiences for our students. Now, I can hire a technology coordinator who can help me do this or you can be that person. Which would you like it to be?’

Superintendent: Yes! I can say that! Thank you so much! I don’t know, I guess I just needed someone’s permission to do this…

I’m not sure why, but I seem to have this conversation every couple of months with some superintendent somewhere in the country.

We trust you with the children but not the Internet

Many schools filter YouTube, Twitter, blogs, wikis, podcasts, social networking, and other content-rich online services for both students and employees. Why on earth would you filter the adults who work for you? This is a loser strategy that prevents educators from accessing potentially-powerful educational material and damages employee morale. Does this make sense to anyone? Nice job, administrators…

Download this file: png ppt pptx

See also my other slides and the Great Quotes About Learning and Change Flickr pool.

Don't teach your kids this stuff. Please?

  

dear parent

  teacher

  administrator

  board member

     

don't teach your kids to read

  for the Web

  to scan

    RSS

    aggregate

    synthesize

 

don't teach your kids to write

  online

pen and paper aren't going anywhere

since when do kids need an audience?

no need to hyperlink

  make videos

    audio

      Flash

      

no connecting, now

no social networking

  or online chat

  or comments

  or PLNs

blogs and twitter?

  how self-absorbed

  what a bunch of crap

and definitely, absolutely, resolutely, no cell phones

block it all

lock it down

keep it out

it's evil, you know

  there's bad stuff out there

    gotta keep your children safe

    

don't you know collaboration is just another word for cheating?

don't you know how much junk is out there?

haven't you ever heard of sexting?

  of cyberbullying?

a computer 24-7? no thanks

  I don't want them

    creating

      sharing

        thinking

          learning

you know they're just going to look at porn

  and hook up with predators

we can't trust them

don't do any of it, please

  

really

'cause I'm doing all of it with my kids

can't wait to see who has a leg up in a decade or two

can you?

  

Is pre-loading a Twitter account for a principal a good idea?

Tom Whitby had an interesting idea: create a Twitter account for a school administrator that was pre-loaded with 50 people to follow.

Beth Still liked the idea and blogged about it. I have some hesitancy, however, about the concept, despite Tom and Beth’s good intentions and despite my inclinations to help administrators by making this social media stuff easy for them [and, yes, I’m now officially changing my mind about item #5 in the hyperlinked post]. Here’s the comment that I left on Beth’s blog:

Although I empathize with the sentiment behind this idea, I confess I have some hesitancy about it. Unlike being handing an iPod loaded with podcasts, which involves no identity infringement, I think most folks would prefer to handle their own online identities. Choice of whether or not to join an online service – or even specific online account usernames and/or Twitter IDs – is critical, I believe, for online identity formation (e.g., I wish I had a common username across services instead of being mcleod in some places, scottmcleod in others, and something else in yet others; I choose to use some online services but not others). What you choose for others may not necessarily be how they’d like to be represented. Also, third parties will begin treating those individuals’ online identities as authentic and representative, despite the fact that you, not they, created them. Your representation may or may not be accurate or fair to the person who has an online identity that supposedly represents her but instead represents your perceptions of her. It’s already tough enough trying to get a handle on the variety of ways in which we can be represented online without our permission. Despite the extremely good intentions here, I’m not sure I’d agree that this is a good thing to do.

The essential question here is whether it’s okay to create an online service account in someone else’s name, regardless of how good your intentions are. Beth says that she would let her administrator fill in his own profile. But she already would have made the account…

If you have thoughts on this, please leave them over at Beth’s post. It should be a good conversation!

Teen sexting: I failed my own information literacy test

I tweeted:

And Barry Dahl replied:

Barry’s right and I’m wrong. I failed my own information literacy test. Why? Because even though I had access to (and linked to) the original report, I didn’t critically consume it the way I should have. Instead I relied on this report from CNN:

And because I did, I made an incorrect statement that then got retweeted by others. Shame on CNN for being misleading and/or inaccurate, but shame on me too for not doing my homework the way I should have. Just because CNN is a traditional, reputable news organization doesn’t mean that I don’t need to be a critical consumer of the information it provides.

Thanks, Barry.

Where are the parents on this?

Two girls post a cartoon video on YouTube that depict “The Top 6 ways to Kill Piper!” Piper is an elementary school classmate of theirs at Elk Plain School in Spanaway, Washington.

The police decline to file charges, saying that “We just don’t believe it was done with any malice or hate.” The girls who made the video apparently are remorseful, although it’s unclear whether that is because they a) now realize how hurtful it was to Piper, b) have been exposed to the larger ramifications of what they did, or c) got caught. Piper and her mother are understandably upset.

And the parents of the two girls? Well, one of the fathers was apparently too busy “cooking dinner” to talk to Piper’s mother about the incident. And, of course, the girls were able to spend hours making the video at home without anyone noticing and/or objecting. Nice parenting…

Video - No Future Left Behind

Here’s a new video, courtesy of Peggy Sheehy, Marianne Malmstrom, and the Net Generation Education Project (hat tip to Angela Maiers!). 

Chain e-mail, privacy, and a bunch of elementary school girls

A fairly disturbing chain e-mail (it mentions rape, murder, and skin flaying) is making the rounds among a group of elementary school girls here. [click here to read it]

A few things to note about this…

1. Most parents of these girls had no idea that this was occurring because they’ve never, ever supervised their elementary school daughters’ e-mail use. Once they found out about this message, many were horrified.
2. Many parents are unsure whether they should be notifying other parents that their daughters are receiving and reading this.
3. Some parents’ reactions have been to see this as confirmation that ‘the Internet’ is ‘evil’ and to consider prohibiting their daughters from using it.
4. At least one parent’s reaction allegedly has been to declare, despite knowing the content of this message, that she doesn’t want to invade her daughter’s privacy because e-mail is like a diary or journal, trusts her daughter to do the right thing, and is (at least publicly) unconcerned that her daughter is passing this along to others.

I tell the administrators with whom I work that schools MUST play a role in educating children about appropriate Internet use. If they don’t, kids and parents will be left to fend for themselves and, as this incident confirms, many parents have little to no clue about what they should be doing in this area.

Thoughts?

2009 Berkman report on online safety

Harvard University's Berkman Center for Internet and Society just released a massive report, Enhancing Child Safety and Online Technologies. Here's a quote from the study:

Sexual solicitation and predation are serious concerns, but the image presented by the media of an older male deceiving and preying on a young child does not paint an accurate picture of the nature of the majority of sexual solicitations and Internet-initiated offline encounters; this inaccuracy leads to major risks in this area being ignored. Of particular concern are the sexual solicitations between minors and the frequency with which online-initiated sexual contact resembles statutory rape rather than other models of abuse. Finally, though some technologies can be more easily leveraged than others for solicitation, risk appears to be more correlated with a youth’s psychosocial profile and risky behaviors than any particular technological platform.

School leaders and policymakers: Read the whole report. Check out the supporting materials. Look over the other recommended resources. Educate yourself so you don’t make policy based on erroneous assumptions. Please?

Tech coordinator pushback

I believe pretty strongly that we should be removing restrictions on students’ access to the Internet in school as they get older. They’re going to live in an unfiltered world. I think they deserve the opportunity to learn how to navigate that complex information space under some adult guidance before we turn them loose after graduation. They don’t learn how to do that if we don’t give them access.

I had some pushback on that idea yesterday during a phone conversation with a school technology coordinator in another state. He basically said that he wasn’t buying my information libertarianism because most employers do some kind of content filtering for their adult employees. He was comfortable with his district’s current options for teachers to quickly request that particular web sites be unblocked.

What do you think? Do you agree with my stance that schools should be opening up the Internet to kids as they reach the upper grades? Or do you concur with the technology coordinator that schools don’t need to provide any more of an unfiltered environment than employers do?

Does anyone think this session is going to present both sides of the issue?

I wish I could attend this to provide a counterbalance to what I’m guessing will be a pretty one-sided conversation. Have any of you gone to one of these events sponsored by your local law enforcement? If so, how was it?

[see also Let’s Just Scare the #$%& Out of Them, Ok?]

Teaching administrators about Wikipedia

[cross-linked at the TechLearning blog]

Last year a middle school librarian in New Jersey received a lot of media attention for her anti-Wikipedia campaign:

Linda O'Connor regards Wikipedia the same way former first lady Nancy Reagan campaigned against drugs. . . . She put up a sign saying "Just Say No to Wikipedia" over the computers in the school library. . . . Wikipedia is blocked on all computers in the Warren Hills Regional School District.

At the time I said that I was highly skeptical about this librarian's stance. On any given day, approximately 1 in 10 Internet users visits Wikipedia. This fact alone should indicate that there's something going on worth paying attention to, something that warrants a more nuanced approach than simply prohibiting access. If it was terrible, it wouldn’t maintain its audience. Folks who take the time to understand Wikipedia learn very quickly that it's actually an amazing site. It's already 8 times larger than the Encyclopedia Brittanica, is growing incredibly quickly, and has been created entirely by volunteers. Peer-reviewed studies published in our top scientific journals have shown that it is as accurate as the Brittanica too, particularly those articles that reside in its mainstream core (rather than at the fringes).

If all of this is true, then why are so many educators, librarians, and media specialists upset about Wikipedia? I think the concerns stem from several different sources. One is their beliefs about accuracy. We tend to assume that print materials such as the Brittanica and school textbooks are error-free when in actuality they contain numerous mistakes. Even when identified, these mistakes usually linger until the next edition is printed and purchased (unlike Wikipedia which corrects known mistakes almost instantly). Second, the idea that volunteers can create something as valuable as that created by experts strikes us as ludicrous. But in this case it happens to be true. Sure, at any given second, some vandal or incompetent may have inserted something inaccurate into a particular article. But over time (and often unbelievably quickly), Wikipedia is remarkably self-healing, unlike the paper materials on our bookshelves. Wikipedia also is a counter to outdated information. How many of the reference books in libraries and school media centers contain incomplete or inaccurate information simply because they're old? Wikipedia doesn't have that problem.

Our students deserve better training about how to navigate our new, complex, online information landscape. They don't learn about information literacy, bias, media literacy, assessment of online validity, and other critical online skills by being denied access to that information. They don't learn how to cite and use online resources appropriately if they can't use those resources and learn from their mistakes because the materials are banned.

If you take half an hour to show administrators these things, their mindset changes. I like to have school leaders visit some Wikipedia pages with me. I start by showing them the asphalt article. After we look at the article itself, I show them the history tab (and take them all the way back to the first few revisions) and then the discussion tab. We talk about what we see and what their perceptions are regarding accuracy, quality, and neutrality. Then I put them into groups to check out more controversial articles like Sarah Palin, Islam, Vladimir Putin, or Pluto. They examine the articles for bias and inaccuracy and spend some time in the history and discussion areas.

The administrators inevitably walk away with a deeper understanding of Wikipedia and a greater appreciation for the safeguards that have evolved to protect against abuse and inaccuracy. Many of them also begin to see the site as an excellent lens for teaching students about how, as a society, we construct knowledge, negotiate meaning, and develop collective understanding. Some even begin to think about how their students might be able to serve as Wikipedia contributors. In the end, that richer understanding may be more valuable than the content of the articles themselves.

How are you using Wikipedia to teach information literacy and critical thinking?

Help wanted: Digital citizenship resources?

I recently got this message from an international school:

I've organized [our] Tech Leadership Team to discuss and develop a Digital Citizenship program for our school. There are 27 members of the TLT and they will be exploring 6 elements, identifying issues associated with the element, brainstorming examples of appropriate and inappropriate use, developing guidelines for use (e.g., guidelines for e-mail, cyberbullying, social networks, piracy, health), and identifying how the concept and guidelines should be shared with the community.

1. Digital Communication
2. Digital Etiquette
3. Digital Law
4. Digital Rights & Responsibilities
5. Digital Health and Wellness
6. Digital Security

I'm looking for a good book for them to read -- any recommendations?

What resources have you found valuable regarding digital citizenship? Here’s my contribution…

• Darren Draper’s edublogger etiquette series

Help! My IT director's locked me down!

Here’s a message that I recently received from a middle school science teacher:

I am a technology-loving science educator. I need your help and here is the short version of my story. I have tried to be a front-end user of educational technology. However, I have lost the ability to effectively utilize technology due to the IT director’s philosophy of restricting all computers for all staff. Last week the IT people took my MacBook and removed administrative privileges – something I have always had. This has coincided with the loss of our curriculum director, who always empowered educators that wanted to be progressive. I was hoping to spend a few minutes talking on the phone in more detail, at your convenience. Please reach out and help a fellow educator! I look forward to your response.

I gave him some empathetic support when we chatted on the phone. I also asked some tough questions about his IT director’s need to restrict his privileges. It didn’t sound like he had abused his administrative privileges. Thoughts for this educator, anyone?

Not so irrelevant 013

My latest roundup of links and tools…

When did the IT staff get promoted above the superintendent?

Will Richardson notes:

[A] school superintendent I spoke with … lamented the fact that his IT staff wouldn’t give him access to YouTube and even Wikipedia.

See also my older post: Principal blogging not allowed.

Math and motocross

Check out this sweet series of motocross math videos at HotChalk. The brains behind the math? Former guest blogger Jason Dyer!

“I didn’t know Sasquatch was real.”

Fun with the Pacific Tree Octopus!

Maybe we should do this for teachers and administrators too

"Seventy-one-year-old Peggy McIntyre needs to learn as much as she can about Windows before 8 a.m. Or else."

Post-Gutenberg economics

It’s now a publish-then-filter world. Clay Shirky notes that “we’re clocking a singularity a week at this point.”

We need to educate our educators

Seth Godin says:

It’s easy to be against something you’re afraid of. And it’s easy to be afraid of something that you don’t understand.

Open your brain, open your model of education

The Education Innovation blog has an interesting post on closed v. open models of education. [Note to self: this might be the world’s longest URL]

Some good thinking going on here

Thanks to Mike Sansone, I recently discovered the Union Square Ventures blog. In Power to the People, they state:

[W]e believe that we are only at the beginning of the web’s impact on the fundamental structure of education. We expect much of that change to be away from the existing educational institutions and towards empowering individuals and newly-formed groups.

In Why the Flow of Innovation Has Reversed, they note:

[T]he vector of innovation has changed. It used to be that innovation started with NASA, flowed to the military, then to the enterprise, and finally to the consumer. Today, it is the reverse. All of the most interesting stuff is being built first for consumers and is tricking back to the enterprise. . . . [O]ne reason this is happening is that the success of a web service is more often determined by its social engineering than its electrical engineering.

Students aren’t the only ones missing the big picture

The Florida Department of Education is concerned that students are missing the big picture when it comes to science. A task force stated that “teachers should provide a broader focus on scientific concepts and process in a 'big picture' sense.” Hmmm… I wonder if that means the Department is going to narrow down the list of required science standards and also pare down the size of approved textbooks. I’m guessing not. Download the full report if you dare.

Disempowered today = disempowered tomorrow

I left this comment at Jim Gates’ Tipline blog:

Students who aren't fluid technology users today will be the low-wage workers and disempowered citizens of tomorrow.

I want it right THERE

Finally, if you’re anal-retentive about your Windows taskbar like I am, check out Taskbar Shuffle.

Publicly available v. readily accessible

The authors of Blown to Bits, an absolutely superb book on life ‘after the digital explosion,’ note that

There is a difference … between ‘public’ and ‘readily accessible.’

Public records such as real estate transfers, birth records, and business transactions often contain sensitive personal information, including Social Security numbers, birth dates, mother’s health information, credit card numbers, voter registration, fingerprints, professional occupations, and the like. While these data technically always have been available to the public, the difficulty of sifting through the paper records made large-scale aggregation and use nearly impossible.

What happens when those public records get digitized, however? What happens when public databases become easily accessible? What happens when paper records are turned into searchable text via optical character recognition and/or tagging? Or, as the authors, note, what happens when all of this public information gets merged with commercial marketing databases?

As the IowaLandRecords.org controversy here in Iowa shows, we need to do some tough thinking on this topic. Just how ‘public’ do we want our public records to be?

A few useful resources

• Arias, M. (2007). Internet access to public records v. privacy: What a complex clash to unravel.
• Bermann, S. (2006). Privacy and access to public records in the digital age.
• Center for Democracy and Technology. (1995). Public records: Access, privacy, and public policy.
• Electronic Privacy Information Center. (2007). Privacy and public records.
• Levitt, C. (2002). Regulating the availability of public records online.
• Levitt, C. (2005). How public are public records?
• Neave, M. (2003). International regulation of the publication of publicly accessible personal information.
• Privacy Rights Clearinghouse. (2006). Public records on the Internet: The privacy dilemma.

Not so irrelevant 011

My latest roundup of links and tools…

The critics need a reboot

David Wolman’s article in Wired Magazine is a quick and effective rebuttal of those who claim that technology is making us stupid.

Social networking for babies

Yep, that’s right. Social networking for babies: Made a mess in my pants today. Slept. Made a mess in my pants today. Slept…

The $70 PC

Using a thin client model for school computers seems like an idea that has promise. And of course a $70 price tag per computer sounds great. Does anyone know a school organization that’s working with NComputing?

Should kids learn about 9/11 via cartoons?

Gary Stager’s got a vein pop about BrainPop…

Handheld learning

Thanks to Dean Shareski, I now know about the Handheld Learning web site. Thanks, Dean!

Youth, porn, and violence

Want the latest facts on youth exposure to pornography and violent web sites? Head to Harvard’s Berkman Center!

Speaking of the Berkman Center…

There is a LOT going on at the Center. Check out its list of projects (the list is clickable thanks to Kwout) and sign up for its news feed!

Karl Fisch is big in Germany

If you didn’t catch it, Karl recently posted about a German magazine’s story about his school and the Did You Know? video. Anybody read German?

Snow in the bathroom

And, finally, here’s a good rule of thumb: don’t read Doug Johnson while you’re supposedly participating in a serious meeting. Thy guffaw mayest disrupt…

I don't like my district's AUP

Last night was Family Night at my kids’ elementary school. You know, that night when you visit your kid’s class with the other parents, learn about the curriculum and teacher expectations for the year, sit in little tiny chairs, etc.

Each parent was asked to sign the district’s Digital Resources Acceptable Use Policy (AUP) for the 2008-2009 school year. Not a single parent read over the AUP; everyone just signed it blindly. Except me, of course. I combed through it because, as a former attorney and technology guy, I want to know what I’m signing on behalf of my fifth-grade daughter. Here’s the part that troubled me:

The following guidelines for digital citizenship apply for all students in grades 3-12:

Inappropriate use includes but is not limited to online chatting, shopping, social networking sites (myspace.com, facebook.com, etc.), games, youtube.com, viewing of inappropriate material, bypassing school filters, downloading and installation of software, and harming the District’s digital resources in any way.

A categorical determination that computer games are ‘inappropriate use?’ A without-exception policy against YouTube, social networking sites, and online chats? I don’t agree! Now what? Do I make a stink with my daughter’s teacher? No, of course not. Do I refuse to sign it, thus preventing my daugher from using the computer in school next week for her class project? No, of course not [she’s already tired of me encouraging her to ask her teacher why she has to practice cursive writing!].

My uneasy compromise was to sign the form and then write under my signature:

I strenuously object to the District’s definition of ‘inappropriate use.’ Although I am signing this so that my daughter can use the computer at school, I reserve the right to contest at any time the District’s definition and this policy.

What do you think? What do you do as a parent when you’re confronted with a district AUP that you think is unnecessarily restrictive? How would you have handled this situation?

[Recently I was invited to serve on the district technology committee. Hopefully I can persuade them to rethink the AUP a little bit…]

No Facebook for you!

Over at the On Our Minds @ Scholastic blog, Tyler Reed is pondering the recent announcement by the Lamar (MS) County School District that it will prohibit teachers from communicating with students via social networking tools such as Facebook or MySpace.

The question in my mind is:

Why treat social networking spaces differently than any other means of teacher communication?

The issue is actual inappropriate teacher communication and/or behavior (which I'm guessing is already covered by board policy), not the method by which teachers communicate with students. A prohibition on use of social networking tools does absolutely nothing to prevent inappropriate teacher communication with students via other channels. So the district either needs to implement similar policies for telephones, snail mail, written notes, instant messaging, cell phone text messaging, e-mail, online video, blogs, wikis, podcasts, and the like or it needs to justify why social networking sites are so evil compared to all the other ways that teachers and students can communicate.

If the district is going to ban social networking and other 21st century communication tools, it's going to be awfully busy making policies since new tools pop up every week. Also, one of the first things you learn in law school is that you should never make a rule you can't enforce. How on earth would the district ever monitor this?

Facebook and MySpace are the 5th and 7th most popular sites on the Internet, respectively. Instead of exploring how teachers, students, and parents can use these sites productively, the district instead has turned into the social networking Nazi: no Facebook for you! Just for kicks, I took a look at the performance of the Lamar County schools. My suggestion for the school board is that perhaps its time and energy would be better spent raising the low academic performance of the students in the poorest school in the district rather than passing unnecessary and unenforceable policies.

This whole thing is just goofy...

Blocking the future

My latest article for the American Association of School Administrators is now online. Titled Blocking the Future, it’s only a page long but I’m really excited about it. Here’s an excerpt:

[S]chool district leaders have a critical choice to make: Will their schools pro-actively model and teach the safe and appropriate use of these digital tools or will they reactively block them out and leave students and families to fend for themselves? Unfortunately, many schools are choosing to do the latter. . . . I can think of no better way to highlight organizational unimportance than to block out the tools that are transforming the rest of society. Schools whose default stance is to prohibit rather than enable might as well plant a sign in front of their buildings that says, “Irrelevant to children’s futures.”

Hopefully this will be a useful reading for your administrators and teachers. Feel free to distribute liberally!

Not so irrelevant 008

My latest roundup of links and tools…

I read blocked blogs

• I’m gettin’ me some of these super-cool buttons (made by Stephanie Sandifer; inspired by Bud Hunt). What a great thing to hand out to administrators!

Are you up to the challenge?

• The 2008 Comment Challenge is now on (and, hey, recognize a fantastic commenter!)

Why K-12 educators shake their heads at academia

• Rick Hess perfectly captures one of my primary complaints about academia, which is that much of what we do is completely inaccessible (and/or meaningless) to K-12 educators

No hand-held electronics in front of the kids!

I was incredulous to read ... the decision by the London Catholic School Board in Ontario banning hand held electronic devices in schools. . . . Even more bizarrely ... school board employees are only allowed to use these devices "in areas from which students are excluded." Taken to its logical extent then this includes staff also being unable to use digital cameras to record student work or projects, create and listen to podcasts and so on.
– Gareth Long

Like Alfie Kohn, Dan Meyer forces us to rethink / justify

• Who do we think we are?
• The difference between us and them
• Sobriety

New tools I’m finding quite useful

• Taboo Firefox extension
• FeedDemon RSS reader

The impetus is on us, not them

Help a teacher develop an integrated lesson [that] ... focuses on a local issue of real importance, in which they, their families, and/or others in their community have a genuine stake and interest. If their learning is situated in that type of context, I think you’ll find the impact of their learning experiences will be far greater, and many more of them will learn digital literacy skills alongside traditional literacy skills. Teaching in a problem-based learning environment is a lot more work than simply lecturing and delivering content to students, but it is the type of learning environment our students need to remain engaged in school work. Too many kids today are BORED by school. As the adults running our schools, it is our responsibility to remedy this situation.
– Wesley Fryer

A couple of gems from Clay Burell…

• Muhammad Ali: A D- student or an F- school?
• Education as pretense: Schooly “speeches” versus real “talks”

And a couple more from Gerald Bracey

• Proficient readers: Dear Strong American Schools (be wary of those NAEP proficiency levels!)
• A test everyone will fail

We are a little egocentric, aren’t we?

• Fujitsu’s world map (thanks, Brett!)

And, finally, a reminder from John Pederson

• Don’t count your Twitter followers

One year ago: Well, what's your answer? and Principal blogging not allowed

Cell phone cameras in the K-12 classroom: Punishable offenses or student-citizen journalism?

[cross-posted at LeaderTalk]

Take a look at the seven YouTube videos below, all taken by student cell phone cameras in classrooms. Do we want students bringing to public attention these types of classroom incidents? Should students be punished or applauded for filming and posting these?

I'd like an idiocy filter, please

I received the e-mail below from yet another person who can’t access my blog at school. How is CASTLE supposed to help school administrators kickstart their schools into the 21st century if they can’t even read one of our primary communication channels?

The idea that all blogs should be categorically blocked - that NOT A SINGLE ONE of the over 100 million blogs out there might have something important or relevant to educators - is both ludicrous and shameful. This type of blocking is not required by CIPA and it’s just plain dumb (see also I don’t like Internet filters).

Dr. McLeod,

I read your "D.I." (a constant reminder just in those two words), but I am unable to click through from school (as I tried today). You must be so dangerous that I really shouldn't even be reading you to  begin with (tongue in cheek).

The atomic-bomb-to-kill-flea net filter that is used here blocks anything in the "web log" area. I am dangerous as well, since my own blogger rants about soccer are blocked.

My other item to vent with you about is the school's new wi-fi network - it is completely blocked from student use (around 15 teachers use it daily). They spent a lot of money on it, and then locked it up so no one could use it. As you suggest many times in D.I., it is easy to become irrelevant - I have seen a few Iphone users on campus that don't even need wi-fi. And when I even slightly suggest to the tech guys that blocking access may not be trusting the students enough, they circle the wagons quickly and become very defensive.

Did I mention that teachers are not allowed access to any networked drive for fear of student access and destruction of data?
I'm sure you have heard of much worse, so I will stop.

Anyway, if you didn't know, you are a troublemaker according to my school. ;-)

Keep up the good work.

I plan to read some of your longer writings this weekend where my own wi-fi network is completely UN-blocked.

Teachers that aren’t allowed access to any networked drives. An expensive Wi-Fi investment that no one can use. Who is steering the ship here? How can this district’s administrators possibly show their face to their community and justify how they have used taxpayer money? This is horrible.

Model AUPs for student empowerment?

I received this e-mail earlier in the week:

My name is [anonymous]. I am a Library Media Director at [high school] in [city, state]. We are a small community, who until recently underwent tremendous growth in the number of students and buildings in our district. I am writing to you because I have been an admirer of your blog and writings on how we, as educators, can shape the educational direction of students using technology. Your posts on Dangerously Irrelevant have inspired me to no longer take a back seat and wait for changes to occur in our district. Now, I'm trying to lead the charge. I have for several years been met with the proverbial "brick wall" when attempting to get the district to allow more access to technology tools on-line. We currently do not permit access to many Web 2.0 sites that actually help with our student's education. With persistent badergering, our Central Administration is allowing me to rewrite our Acceptable Use Policy so students can supplement class instruction with blogs, access academic content from YouTube and similar video sites, and post information on wikis. I would love to know what you believe should be in an AUP that addresses the concerns of today but is still conscious of the technology access of tomorrow. I'm sure you are very busy, but any help you can provide to me and my students would be greatly appreciated.

Here is my rather lame response:

Hi [anonymous], I haven't really seen any good model AUPs, but then again I haven't gone looking. Here are a couple of links:

http://www.doe.state.in.us/olr/aup/aupmod.html
http://tinyurl.com/2s7o8o

I would find some tech-savvy districts in your state and see how they're handling their AUPs. They may be better resources for you than I am. Maybe the edublogosphere has some suggestions for us both?

So, how about it? Does anyone have, or know of, a good student AUP that can serve as a model for others? One that seems to appropriately address the safety concerns of districts while simultaneously affording students access to the digital tools that are revolutionizing the rest of society?

You know, NSBA, AASA, NASSP, and/or NAESP (and their state affiliates) should be helping districts with this. Maybe some of these leadership organizations are and we just need to bring their efforts to the forefront?

School video that mocked student with disabilities posted on YouTube

[cross-posted at the TechLearning blog]

A video production teacher at Montville High School in New Jersey had her students create a public service announcement (PSA) as a class assignment. The students decided to make an anti-bullying video and assigned roles for the skit. B.B., a junior with multiple cognitive and social disabilities, was selected to be the victim. Other students then emptied garbage cans on his head, slapped him, and pushed him to the ground. The video concluded with a teacher breaking up the bullying activity and an anti-bullying message.

Sadly, the video was then edited by some students and posted on YouTube. The YouTube version omitted the anti-bullying aspects of the video and only showed B.B. being bullied. The YouTube version was viewed over 3,700 times before it was taken down. B.B. became the subject of taunts and teasing in school, severe enough that he missed school for a month. His mother has now sued the teacher, principal, superintendent, and school board under the state’s anti-bullying law for failing to sufficiently protect her son after the teasing began.

This incident raises multiple issues worthy of consideration. In no particular order, here are a few questions and thoughts…

1. Where did the original video file reside? Presumably the editing of the PSA was done at school since it was a video production class. What precautions, if any, were taken regarding storage and/or possible dissemination of the PSA? Did each student involved in creating the video get a copy?
2. Who owns the original video? The school? The students who made it? Both? What rights does each party have to do with the video what it wishes?
3. Was the edited YouTube version of the video created at school? If so, the school’s AUP should cover the offending student’s behavior. Although the offending student was identified, it is unclear what disciplinary action, if any, was taken against him/her.
4. In addition to the state law, presumably the school has an anti-bullying policy. Can a minor student with multiple cognitive and social disabilities legally consent to “fake” bullying? Is there any argument of consent or assumption of risk for this situation?
5. One of the necessary elements of a defamation claim is that the victim’s reputation was harmed substantially enough to warrant a legal remedy. Is this harder to prove for a minor student than it would be for an adult, particularly given the rampant teasing that occurs in schools?

There are lots of issues here, but these are the ones that initially jump out at me. I think B.B.’s attorney was right when he said that B.B. never should have been selected in the first place to be the bullying victim. That said, any of the students conceivably could have been teased if they were in his place. B.B. just appears to be a particularly sensitive student because of his disabilities.

As teachers and students in schools continue to create more digital content as part of coursework, we will see more stories like this. The portability and modifiability of digital files, combined with the openness of the Internet and the ready availability of content creation tools, make these types of situations difficult to prevent. The challenge for schools will be to balance appropriate safety and supervision concerns with the pedagogical advantages that often accompany the use of digital technologies. Think about the digital content that is created in your school: is your organization at risk for similar inappropriate appropriation of content by a student or staff member?

[thanks to Jim Gates at Tipline for pointing me to this story]

Just Say No to Wikipedia

A middle school librarian in New Jersey has gotten some media attention for her anti-Wikipedia campaign:

Linda O'Connor regards Wikipedia the same way former first lady Nancy Reagan campaigned against drugs. . . . She put up a sign saying "Just Say No to Wikipedia" over the computers in the school library. . . . Wikipedia is blocked on all computers in the Warren Hills Regional School District.

I’m highly skeptical.

If the district is going to take a principled stand against Wikipedia because some information is biased or incorrect, is it also taking out all of the encyclopedias (which research has shown, on average, to be as inaccurate as Wikipedia)? Is it removing all of the news magazines and newspapers? The article makes a big deal about how school librarians preview materials before they’re placed on the shelves, but I can guarantee you that librarians and media specialists do not have time to screen every word of every incoming publication. They miss errors and biases just like the Wikipedia community does. Also, it’s ludicrous to pretend that the school library vetting process is free of bias. Oh, and I challenge you to find a school library that doesn’t have old, outdated (and thus inaccurate) non-fiction and/or reference materials on its shelves.

This is all of a bunch of hooey. This shouldn’t have even been a story. When is the Associated Press going to run this story?

Schools teach kids how to wisely and appropriately navigate 21st century information channels

Or this one?

New Jersey school district blocks kids from using one of the most important and powerful information resources in existence because of mistaken beliefs about inaccuracy and bias

Or maybe this one?

Wikipedia is an amazing contribution to the body of human knowledge. New Jersey school district says ‘No thanks.’

Or is it asking too much of the newspaper press to avoid bias by showing the other side of this issue?

Youth violence and electronic media

This arrived in my e-mail inbox yesterday:

CDC REVIEW OF ELECTRONIC MEDIA AND YOUTH VIOLENCE
Research Shows Increase in Electronic Aggression

In September 2006, experts from academic institutions, federal agencies, and nonprofit organizations gathered at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) in Atlanta, Georgia, to better understand the varied ways new media technology – blogs, instant messaging, chat rooms, email, text messaging and the Internet – influences youth aggression. The two-day meeting, "Electronic Media and Youth Violence," was held to review current research and to discuss the implications for youth, parents, school staff, and educational policymakers. Data from the review show although rates of electronic aggression are lower than rates of physical and verbal aggression, these rates seem to be increasing. In 2000, 6 percent of internet users ages 10 to 17 said they had been subjected to online harassment; by 2005, the percentage had risen to 9 percent – an increase of 50 percent. 

The complete review can found in the December 2007 supplement of the Journal of Adolescent Health. To access a complete copy of the Journal and the supporting issue briefs, which summarize the research and discuss the implications of these findings for youth, parents, school staff, and educational policy makers, please visit www.cdc.gov/injury.

A few thoughts…

1. Most parents probably don’t do near enough at home to teach and monitor children’s appropriate usage of electronic communication tools. We know that schools and religious institutions don’t when kids are with them. So why should we be surprised that some children and adolescents are using these tools for inappropriate purposes? It’s like Lord of the Flies out there when it comes to adult supervision!
2. The JAH research articles on this topic are impressive. It’s going to take me a while to read through them all. My first scan, however, is that while there seems to be a bevy of top notch, peer-review-quality research there, it’s all on the harmful effects of communication technologies and none on the empowering effects of the same. We need good, data-based information on this topic, but I’d like to see academia provide some counterpoint research on the positive aspects too, not just more fear-driven research. I want to also see a two-day meeting on Electronic Media and Youth Empowerment. We’re not going to back to a tech-less society. Why can’t we get info on both sides of the coin so that we can make intelligent decisions about this stuff?
3. ‘An increase of 50 percent’ sounds ominous. An actual rise from 6 percent to 9 percent doesn’t. Presentation makes all the difference.
4. The policy implications from the expert panel crack me up. Essentially the panel said ‘The federal government should do very little. The states should do more. School districts and schools should do the most.’ In other words, they could have just typed the word ‘federalism’ on a piece of paper, handed it in, and gone out for coffee. Nice job, folks!

Cause and effect? Or just ironic?

Earlier this week I blogged about fighting fearmongering. PREA Prez notes that the next day his district blocked my blog:

[click on image for larger version]

Ironic timing, isn’t it, Doug?

Fight the fearmongers

One of the biggest things standing in the way of student technology usage in schools is adults' fear.

Over at the Blue Skunk Blog, Doug Johnson posted a message from our mutual friend and Internet safety guru Nancy Willard that described all of the fearmongering that she's seeing as she travels the country. In the comments to Doug's post, John Pederson said that there's no 'sticky' message to counter the fearmongering.

So Doug's sponsoring a contest. Come up with the best 'sticky' message and win a prize from Doug. All submissions are due November 1 so get yours in soon!

Educational benefits of social networking

Check out the transcript of Will Richardson's live online chat about the educational benefits of social networking. Part of the fun at this year's T+L conference!

FYI, tomorrow is an online discussion with Thomas Hutton, senior staff attorney for the National School Boards Association, on navigating the legal landmines associated with new technologies. You know I'm looking forward to reading that!

We're done with 'em. Now what?

[this post is my contribution to Blog Action Day]

E-waste is an enormous environmental issue. Digital technologies such as computers and electronic gadgets are full of toxic metals and other harmful materials. Proper disposal or recycling of these technologies is imperative.

Educators can't claim to be ignorant anymore. The deleterious effects of e-waste are increasingly well-known. As public agencies, schools have a special responsibility not to harm future generations through irresponsible jettisoning of old computer equipment.

For every school district that has a disposal / recycling plan in place, there's probably another that doesn't. There are countless stories of old computers stacked up in school warehouses and storerooms. Similarly, for every school leader that's struggling with what to do with old equipment, there are several who have never even thought about the issue.

Ask your school leaders tomorrow: "What do we do with our old computing equipment?" If they don't know, help them find out the answer. Investigate what really happens to the computers that get carted away. Even if you think they're being recycled, it may not be what you think.

My School Technology Safety and Security course at U. Minnesota included a computer disposal / recycling unit. I hope to create the same here at Iowa State. Additionally, I have begun making a conscious effort to reduce my technological footprint. It's very hard; I drool over every new cool technogadget that comes out. But, as I noted before, I've got too much stuff.

What are you doing personally to reduce your digital footprint? What are you doing professionally to help school leaders understand the scale and importance of the K-12 computer disposal issue? What are you doing academically to help students understand the technology-related environmental issues that their generation will face?

As Joel Barker notes, "No one will thank you for taking care of today if you have failed to take care of tomorrow."

Rule by exception

As usual, Seth Godin nails it right on the head:

If we don't slam this door shut, then everyone will do it...

This is really why we lock everything out in schools, isn't it? In K-12, we like to rule by exception rather than dealing with exceptions individually. We're doubtful of our ability to stop the slippery slope.

Surveillance society, safe schools

[cross-posted at LeaderTalk]

Metal detectors. Dog sniffs. Networked surveillance cameras. Bar codes. Swipe cards. Biometrics. Thermal imaging. Wire taps and electronic communication monitoring. Blood and urine testing. Cell phone, pager, and transit card tracking. Radio frequency identification (RFID) tags. Facial recognition software. GPS tracking. Correlation of disparate online databases. Microchip implantation. National identity cards. Everyware. And so on...

We are rapidly approaching a time where every move - every action - can be monitored, archived, and correlated. The right of privacy precious to many is rapidly disappearing as we trade it for safety and convenience. The surveillance society is right around the corner, if it's not already here.

On the school front, many administrators dispense with students' 4th Amendment rights in the name of 'safety.' They know what the law says, but community pressures or perceived dangers outweigh Constitutional rights. Many of these administrators are in schools with no history of violence or threats. But Columbine freaked everyone out - if it could happen there, it could happen anywhere - so anything goes when it comes to student rights.

Benjamin Franklin said, "Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." The United States Supreme Court, in West Virginia Board of Ed. v. Barnette, said, "That they are educating the young for citizenship is reason for scrupulous protection of Constitutional freedoms of the individual, if we are not to strangle the free mind at its source and teach youth to discount important principles of our government as mere platitudes."

As leaders, we should be discussing these issues - with each other, with our communities, with our students. Do we really want to live in a surveillance society? Do we still care about the 4th Amendment right to be free from suspicionless search? What is the proper balance between legitimate concern and undifferentiated fear? What kind of world do we want to leave for our children?

Ergonomic computing

The more time we spend at our computers, the more importance we need to place on proper ergonomics. Prevent repetitive stress injuries, back pain, and eye strain by checking out the resources below. Your body will thank you for it.

Is your primary computing place ergonomically correct?

Ergonomic resources

• Ergotron - Make Your Workstation Fit You (see image above)
• UC-Irvine Ergonomic Review Tool
• CDC Computer Workstation Ergonomics
• CU Ergo (particularly the product and posture evaluations)
• UNC Office Ergonomics
• HealthyComputing

Coding online communication to detect sexual predators

Some of you may remember that I’m headed to Iowa State University in about a month. I ran across a story on its news service last week about Chad Harms, a professor in the Greenlee School of Journalism and Communication, who has been doing research on how online sexual predators ‘groom’ their child victims and how their online communication can be coded to detect predatory behavior. Read the story and follow the links. This looks like interesting stuff, particularly if you could automate the coding so that it could be done by computer software.

I don't like Internet filters

I don't like Internet filters, and not just because many folks can't read my blog (thanks, Mark!).

I don't like them because they impede political awareness (see, e.g., Andy Carvin's fantastic post on this).

I don't like them because in order to exercise one's right to free speech one also must have access to speech:

[T]he Constitution protects the right to receive information and ideas. This right is an inherent corollary of the rights of free speech and press that are explicitly guaranteed by the Constitution. . . . The dissemination of ideas can accomplish nothing if otherwise willing addressees are not free to receive and consider them. It would be a barren marketplace of ideas that had only sellers and no buyers. . . . More importantly, the right to receive ideas is a necessary predicate to the recipient's meaningful exercise of his own rights of speech, press, and political freedom. [Board of Education, Island Trees Union Free School Dist. v. Pico, 457 U.S. 853 (1982)]

And I don't like them because of the message they send to students: in an information economy, we don't trust you with information.

Blocking wikis

My academic colleague, Dr. Jon Becker, and I are working on an online school law guide for NASSP. As part of that process, he and I put a list of topics to be covered up on a wiki for some of NASSP's reviewers to see and comment upon. One of them said that her school district server didn't like the wiki being hosted by wikispaces and posted a warning that it left the server more vulnerable to hackers. That sounded kind of goofy to me. Can someone explain to me how an externally-hosted wiki can increase a school district server's vulnerability?

Pennsylvania legislators want to lock it down

Jim Gates points out that Pennsylvania legislators have introduced a bill to ban cellphones and 'other portable electronic devices that record or play audio or video material.' The language of the bill seems very broad. Wouldn't digital camcorders, digital voice recorders, boomboxes, laptop computers, portable media players, and other non-cellphone-type devices also fall under its very inclusive verbiage? Note that schools only are able to make two narrow exceptions. Nowhere in the bill does it allow schools to permit students to use 'portable electronic devices that record or play audio or video material' for pedagogical purposes.

Principal Lehmann, sorry. If this bill passes, you're going to have to shut down Philadelphia's Science Leadership Academy. Microsoft, thanks for trying. Unless the language in this bill becomes less inclusive, say goodbye to Philadelphia's School of the Future. One-to-one laptop programs? Steer clear of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania!

Was there widespread abuse of cellphones in Pennsylvania, maybe worse than in other states, that prompted this bill? Or is this just another example of the lock-it-down mentality held by so many policymakers? Ugh. First New York City. Now Pennsylvania.

Oh, by the way, State Representative Angel Cruz, Democrat from Philadelphia, invites your input on this proposed bill. So go ahead, let him know what you think.

Interview with Sara Dexter

On Sunday I had the pleasure of being interviewed by Dr. Sara Dexter. Sara is an Assistant Professor of technology leadership in the Department of Leadership, Foundations, and Policy at the University of Virginia. Sara had the students in her Technology Legal, Ethical, and Safety Policies course listen to the podcast I did with Tim Wilson in September 2005. Her students had some additional questions about legal issues and digital technologies in schools, so she arranged a follow-up podcast. If you're interested, here's the link to the podcast of our conversation:

• May 6, 2007 - Interview with Dr. Sara Dexter

Principal blogging not allowed

On Monday I got an e-mail from an elementary principal:

Scott, it looks like I won't be able to follow through with the [Principal Blogging Project]. Our district technology person has decided not to open up access to blog sites, therefore I cannot access the site from school (our filter blocks it).

In other words, the principal cannot set up a blog to communicate with his school community because the district technology coordinator, who is in a support position, won’t let him. Here was my reply:

This is disappointing. As Director of CASTLE, I work quite a bit with principals, superintendents, and technology coordinators. I'm always sad to hear when technological decisions are made that get in the way of enabling administrators' / teachers' work. I think that technology should be about enabling good educational practices, not gatekeeping or shutting them down because of fear / safety concerns. There are many, many schools and districts where principals, superintendents, teachers, and others are blogging to both internal and external communities. Why can't your district be one of those places? How are you going to expose students, teachers, parents, and administrators to the technological transformations that are revolutionizing American and global societies if you shut it all down? If things change (or if there's any way I can help you maybe persuade someone to think differently about this), let me know.

Here is the principal’s final e-mail to me:

I agree. I tried to work it through and was not successful. I loved the blogging idea, it was nice and easy for me, and I knew that I would be able to get staff on board. Unfortunately, not everyone is as forward thinking.

This tale’s been told before. Technology coordinators who are more concerned with disabling than enabling. Technology personnel that we would hope would be progressive, forward thinkers regarding digital technologies but instead are regressive gatekeepers. Teachers and administrators that try to move into the 21st century but run into the brick wall of supervisors or support personnel. Superintendents that allow such situations to occur rather than insisting that their district figure out how to make it work (like other districts have). Educators that fail to understand that the world around them has changed and that their relevance to that world is diminishing daily.

This tale’s been told before, but it’s still depressing.

P.S. See my previous post.

An F for vulgarity, an A for free speech

There has been both good commentary and handwringing in the education blogosphere over the recent decision in A.B. v. State (Ind.App.2007). For example, see the following:

• Tim Stahmer
• Dave Sherman
• Wesley Fryer
• Mark van ‘t Hooft

For those of you who are interested, here’s my comment on Dave Sherman's post:

Dave, please see

http://tinyurl.com/2abg58

and my online presentation at

http://tinyurl.com/2ynpvz

In the case you cite, A.B. v. State (Ind.App.2007), the Greencastle Middle School student posted the following message on MySpace:

Hey you piece of greencastle sh-t. What the f-ck do you think of me [now] that you can['t] control me? Huh? Ha ha ha guess what I'll wear my f-cking piercings all day long and to school and you can['t] do sh-t about it! Ha ha f-cking ha! Stupid bastard! Oh and kudos to whomever made this ([I'm] pretty sure I know who). Get a background.

Here's what the court said:

A.B. openly criticizes Gobert's imposed school policy on decorative body piercings and forcefully indicates her displeasure with it. While we have little regard for A.B.'s use of vulgar epithets, we conclude that her overall message constitutes political speech. Addressing a state actor, the thrust of A.B.'s expression focuses on explicitly opposing Gobert's action in enforcing a certain school policy.

The court also found insufficient harm to result from A.B.'s speech

the State failed to produce any evidence that A.B.'s expression inflicted particularized harm analogous to tortuous injury on readily identifiable private interests as required to rebut A.B.'s claim of political speech.

One of the key aspects of libel is that you have to prove harm to your reputation. It appears that the court in this case viewed this as a student spouting off on a school policy issue, which was well within her rights, and found insufficient harm to the principal's reputation to warrant a finding of libel.

Dave, you say that you're worried about this happening to you. Is this any different than a post that said, "I disagree with Mr. Sherman's policy on piercings? Who does he think he is? He can't control me. I'm going to do whatever I want and there's nothing he can do about it. I hate you, Mr. Sherman."?

As you know, you need to have a thick skin when you're a principal!

Finally, I’ll close with some quotes. My favorite school law quote of all time is the one from the Barnette case:

• Without debate, without criticism, no administration and no country can succeed and no republic can survive. - Pres. John F. Kennedy
• If the freedom of speech is taken away then dumb and silent we may be led, like sheep to the slaughter. - Pres. George Washington
• That [schools] are educating the young for citizenship is reason for scrupulous protection of Constitutional freedoms of the individual, if we are not to strangle the free mind at its source and teach youth to discount important principles of our government as mere platitudes. - West Virginia v. Barnette (1943)
• If we don't believe in freedom of expression for people we despise, we don't believe in it at all. - Noam Chomsky

Administrator's guide to cyberbullying

My contribution to Stop Cyberbullying Day is going to be threefold. First, this quick quiz:

Online Poll Using WebSurveyor

Second, although my graphic design skills aren't the greatest, I made some badges that can be used by others as desired:

• Stop Cyberbullying images

Third, I created an online presentation that outlines the basic legal parameters for dealing with student or employee cyberbullying incidents:

• Administrator's Guide to Cyberbullying (23 minutes)

I made it quickly, so it's not as polished as it could be, but I hope that it's helpful for school administrators and other technology leaders across the country. The presentation goes into detail about the six cyberbullying cases that have resulted in a judicial decision, describes why five of those cases have gone against the school officials, and then outlines some other options that schools have for dealing with electronic bullying or harassment. [FYI, the presentation is a modified version of the longer presentation I gave on this topic last December. Comments or suggestions regarding the presentation are most welcome. I can revise and repost it easily.]

I'm looking forward to seeing other folks' contributions to Stop Cyberbullying Day and am hopeful that we'll see a significant flurry of activity on this topic today. Thanks, Andy, for this great idea.

Update: here's another case that went against the school.

Stop Cyberbullying Day

Andy Carvin at Learning Now has declared this Friday, March 30, to be Stop Cyberbullying Day. I encourage everyone to read Andy's post and join in. Share a story, take a stand, but don't be silent. You'll see a post from me on this topic on Friday for sure.

Also, I made a few images for people's web sites or blogs. They're not the best but feel free to use them as desired.

Feds can't make up their mind regarding Internet filtering

[cross-posted at The Gate]

In case you haven't been following the issue, the federal government can't make up its mind regarding Internet filtering. On the one hand, government attorneys vigorously argued for Internet filtering mechanisms as part of the Children's Internet Protection Act (CIPA), which was upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court in 2004:

A library's use of filtering software to block material covered by CIPA is constitutional. The district court itself found that filtering software is a reasonably effective way to block pornographic material, and that such material falls outside of a public library's traditional collection boundaries. The district court's finding that filtering software erroneously blocks some constitutionally protected speech does not undermine the reasonableness of their use. (see http://tinyurl.com/2omvsp)

In contrast, federal attorneys have attacked software filters as burdensome and ineffective in their attempts to defend the Child Online Protection Act (COPA), which keeps getting blocked by federal courts:

The court of appeals also erred in holding that filtering software is a sufficient alternative to COPA's mandatory screening requirement. Filtering software is not nearly as effective as COPA's screening requirement in shielding minors from commercial domestic pornography on the Web. Filtering software is voluntary, while COPA's screening requirement is mandatory. Filtering software also blocks some sites that are not harmful; it fails to block some sites that are harmful; it can be expensive for parents to purchase; and it quickly becomes outdated. Congress also did not view mandatory screening and blocking software as an either or choice. It mandated screening and encouraged the use of blocking software as well. That combined approach is far more effective than the use of voluntary blocking software alone. (see http://tinyurl.com/322qnc)

Huh?

GPS bus tracking

Listen to this post!

A couple of days ago Network World had a story on the latest generation of GPS technologies used to track schoolbuses. The Everyday Wireless system that was profiled also has the ability to record when and where students board and disembark the bus.

Is GPS tracking of school buses a rational use of technology to optimize bus routes? Another example of overblown fear? A call for parental action like chipping kids?

The One Percent Doctrine

Listen to this post!

Pete Reilly’s excellent post should be required reading for school administrators worried about online safety issues. I’ve blogged about this issue before, notably here and here. As Pete states, the actual intersections of online predators with schoolchildren are exceedingly low.

On a similar note, David Warlick recognizes that middle class parents are afraid to let their children roam their ‘seemingly safe’ neighborhoods.

All of this fear, most of it unfounded (at least statistically), has led many (most?) parents and administrators to operate from what author Ron Suskind calls the ‘One Percent Doctrine.’ Suskind uses this phrase to describe Vice President Dick Cheney’s (and others’) thoughts about the war on terrorism:

If there was even a 1 percent chance of terrorists getting a weapon of mass destruction -- and there has been a small probability of such an occurrence for some time -- the United States must now act as if it were a certainty.

This seems to capture the beliefs of school administrators, school communities, and parents pretty well: if there is even a 1 percent chance of something bad happening online, we need to act as if it were a certainty. Of course the concurrent question that administrators and parents should be asking is What do we lose when we operate using the One Percent Doctrine? I’m afraid that too many schools spend too little time asking themselves this question, but I am encouraged that at least some schools are thinking hard about this issue.

Thanks, Dean Shareski, for linking me to Pete’s post!

Chart week - Internet safety

Today is the fourth day of Chart Week here at Dangerously Irrelevant. Today’s post relates to the various technologies and procedures that public schools use to protect students from inappropriate Internet material. All data are from the recently-released NCES report, Internet Access in U.S. Public Schools and Classrooms: 1994-2005.

Technologies and procedures used by public schools to prevent student access to inappropriate Internet material

Public schools have a variety of options when it comes to protecting students from inappropriate material on the Web. As the chart below shows, nearly every school is using blocking / filtering software. In addition, nearly every school says that teachers or other staff members monitor student Internet usage.

The federal data are unclear whether acceptable use policies (AUPs) are in place in schools. What NCES asked is whether schools ask parents and students to sign written contracts regarding Internet usage. About a fourth of schools in 2005 did not ask students to sign a contract and about a fifth of schools did not ask parents to sign a contract regarding student Internet use. These percentages were the same as in 2002. Elementary schools (72%) were less likely in 2005 to have students sign contracts than secondary schools (88%). City schools (72%) were less likely to have students sign contracts than rural schools (82%).

It may be that schools have a student AUP in place but simply are not asking students or parents to sign that they have read and understand the AUP. It also may be that schools are relying on filtering / monitoring software and teacher monitoring alone. Either way, all schools should realize that AUPs can be powerful tools for school regulation and enforcement of appropriate Internet usage and should not assume constructive notice via student handbooks or school policy binders.

Other options employed by public schools to address student usage of the Internet include use of intranets to control student access, student honor codes, and monitoring software (e.g., keystroke logging and other surveillance software).

Schedule for the rest of the week

• Friday - professional development for use of the Internet in public school classrooms

Mindworks: Internet safety

Here's a fun video from the Minneapolis Star Tribune. A reporter interviewed local teens on the topic of Internet safety. Nothing too earth-shattering here, but fun nonetheless.

• Mindworks: Internet safety video