Group+4+Memo

Memorandum To: Superintendent, Bloomingtown School District
RE: Recommendation on school-provided Internet regulation and discussion of the Acceptable Use Policy Dated: 11/10/2009

It has been apparent from our research that as the Internet has begun to play a larger role in schools, students are in danger of being exposed to inappropriate material. There are simply not enough resources to monitor every student that is on the Internet at any given time. Yet it is the school's responsibility to make sure that the students are not using the Internet to view material that is not approved by the parents. Because of this, we are suggesting that the schools install filters that will block websites that are deemed inappropriate. This will help make sure that the students are using the Internet for school purposes only and are not as vulnerable to any graphic, offensive, or dangerous Internet sites. Furthermore, this will block inappropriate sites that are accessed unintentionally by the students. Our assessment is that burdening teachers with the responsibility to monitor use of an unfiltered Internet would negatively impact their time, taking away from their primary role to provide instruction, assist students, and perform other school related tasks. Lastly, an important consideration is compliance with the [|Child Internet Protection Act (CIPA)], which still mandates "technology protection measures" in schools and libraries.

The argument exists that adding filters is counterproductive in that it excuses teachers from the responsibility of teaching students the skills to navigate the Internet safely and responsibly. We would respond that this is not the case, that the presence of filters does not eliminate the ability to educate about critical aspects about the Internet including safe and responsible use. Our recommendation is to incorporate teaching children at an age appropriate level what their rights and responsibilities are in regard to the Internet into the curriculum. At the same time filtering will be used as a tool to limit exposure to inappropriate material while this learning is taking place. As mentioned earlier, it is not only a problem of students actively seeking out inappropriate material, but also a matter of unintentional viewing. The presence on the Internet of misleading links and scam situations means that there is always the possibility that student users may run across unwanted and unsolicited material that nevertheless violates our Internet usage policy. This is the type of situation that we believe can be minimized with the implementation of filtering in the schools.

We would also like to address the argument that filter blocking prohibits access to school-relevant sites by informing you that filtering technology exists which would allow school faculty to override the blocking of a site. This creates a way for the students to view sites that are important to their studies that may have been blocked by the filter. There is precedent for this, as deemed by the Supreme Court in [|FCC Order 03-188] which also states compliance with CIPA and the First Amendment with respect to libraries in reference to filtering: "A ssuming that such erroneous blocking presents constitutional difficulties, any such concerns are dispelled by the ease with which patrons may have the filtering software disabled. When a patron encounters a blocked site, he need only ask a librarian to unblock it or (at least in the case of adults) disable the filter."

The Internet in many ways acts as a filter for viewing the mores, laws and culture that make-up the fabric of our society. While the Internet provides a great virtual reality for brainstorming and human interaction, removing many of the barriers of face-to-face encounters, it cannot entirely dissolve the human in its encounters. It is for this very reason that we recommend boundaries be set and enforce them for age appropriate viewing. Even in a free democratic state there are distinctions for what is deemed acceptable material for school age children versus teenagers versus adults. These mores, systems of protection for the innocent do not suddenly dismiss themselves in a liminal reality. Even in the liminal reality of cyberspace, the engineers are still very much attached to their human bodies and thereby a wide range of human nature. It is for this reason, that we apply the same standards of conduct, the same boundaries of appropriate and acceptable behavior that we would in a face to face encounter. As in life, even in a virtual neighborhood for every Little Red Riding Hood, there exists a Big Bad Wolf.

At the same time, when it comes to scholastic research and independent thought in the upper grade levels we want to be careful not to transform into a bureaucracy of mini dictatorships and fasten the keys to the kingdom in the hands of any __one__ teacher to decide what is an acceptable internet site, thereby undermining the fabric of a free and democratic society. Additionally, censorship has been an issue raised and breached through the ages, and the "we" generation continually redefines how "we" interpret decency through the ages and/or what degree of graciousness we extend to taboo topics. "We" are cognizant of this and our aim is in no way to become a filter ourselves blocking thought, but simply an escort through the woods to Grandmother's house, keeping a spam hammer handy for the Big Bad Wolves that seek to exploit the innocent for their own pleasure and/or financial gain, just as any responsible adult would be inclined to do in a face-to-face encounter.


 * Implementation Plan And Acceptable Use Policy**

Upon research of available filtering technology and secure network implementation, we have come up with some suggestions for a possible scenario regulating Internet usage for the various computer settings in the schools. The system would involve setting up all computers on a school wide, secure network, and requiring all school staff and students to be assigned a network login. Teachers, students and community youth and adults will each be provided appropriate levels of Internet access depending on the type of account they are provided on the network. Network administration will then determine to what degree filtering is implemented. Teachers and community adults will be given accounts which provide full Internet access without filtering, while student and community youth will be given restricted, filtered access. In addition, the district will retain control of which web sites can be made available (or not available) to specific accounts and can maintain "exceptions" to such sites on individual accounts or groups of accounts to allow access (or deny it) as requested and determined by school faculty. Also, school faculty will be provided the capability to "override" any filtering to specific sites through a password protected system. This system can be seen as a compromise between filtering and providing open Internet access by giving faculty a way to allow access to sites for themselves or their students at their discretion.

Having provided this recommendation to establish filtering technology for Internet usage in the Bloomingtown schools, we are outlining suggestions below for modifications and additions to be made to the Acceptable Use Policy to reflect what impact filtering will have for the school, students and the community. While the AUP remains largely satisfactory for the District's needs as implemented, these are the key points we suggest need addressing:


 * Mention of the filtering measures being utilized to regulate access to the Internet should be made in the section describing the Bloomingtown Schools' stated educational missions, goals and objectives. It should be made clear that the filtering measures are a tool to assist faculty in guidance of curriculum and does not take the place of instruction of student users important skills on how to exercise judgment for oneself on the value of information they find on the Internet. Guidance in this area will be one aim of education, but ultimate responsibility lies with the individual student users themselves and their family.
 * It would be advised that some acknowledgment in reference to the stated uses of school-provided Internet access that the filtering measures put in place cannot guarantee prevention of instances where material might be accessed that violates these uses. The intention of the filtering is, as mentioned earlier, a tool for guiding curriculum that is consistent with school objectives, and also to provide some protection against material that violates the AUP. But given the dynamic nature of the Internet that protection is not fool proof. Responsibility to follow the proper use of school-provided Internet access, even when filtering measures are in place, still falls on the user and not on the Bloomingtown Schools.
 * The recent prevalence of social networking sites represents a special case as the content available in such sites is dynamic and difficult to regulate. Determination to what degree social networking tools help to contribute to the classroom setting will influence future decisions by the District on whether filtering measures should apply to these services, or at least a certain subset of these services.
 * And lastly, in the information provided to parents of students in the Bloomingtown Schools, the section which mentions the possibility of "methods or systems to regulate students' Internet access" would obviously need to be changed to inform parents that such methods will be in place through the use of Internet filtering. The followup statement that states these methods will not guarantee compliance with the District's acceptable use policy remains valid.


 * Conclusion**

Finally, we seek to implement these measures more so by structuring behavior than content. As is true in any educational environment the more that we are able to provide an exciting and diverse atmosphere, where learning is the star and filtering and acceptable use are supporting characters, the greater our success in producing educated members of the online community. Just as we socialize children not to take candy from strangers, we seek to educate young Internet surfers on what precautions are likewise acceptable in a cyber community. While we often give our children commands like "Don't take candy from strangers!" we do not always explain our fears or the dangers that loom close to such commands, or the consequences to the child. Likewise, it is not always appropriate to explain our fears or dangers to children about the cyber community, however we can still reinforce similar commands: "Don't give out your telephone or address to friends over the internet"; "Don't give out the name of your school or neighborhood to people you chat with as they may not be who you think they are". It may not be necessary to follow these fears up with horrific and graphic descriptions of what we think could happen, but what we do emphasize is safety and acceptable use. In so doing, we hope to keep the Internet in its vast and amazing potential a safe and age-appropriate tool for its littlest surfers. Ultimately, we are sticking to form and continuing in a long tradition of being a society that protects its children. We hope that you will partner with us in keeping and implementing a flexible and reasonable AUP that is designed to promote education, teach safety and adapt to age appropriate uses of the Internet in an educational environment. Finally, we seek to focus on education during school hours and keep that as the ultimate goal in the educational environment. Type in the content of your page here.

Link to Group 4 - Research Notes