Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.
Unintended          Consequences      t h e l o c a l i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f         f e d e r a l p o l i c y - ...
Unintended          Consequences      t h e l o c a l i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f         f e d e r a l p o l i c y - ...
AbstractIn the absence of leadership in the Hawaii Department of Education with requisitetechnological expertise to unders...
the ProblemA student in AP Chem takes her laptop to the School Libraryand attempts to view a video podcast of a Chemistry ...
The Problem II17 and 18 year-old high school students and adult teachers arerestricted in access to the internet at the sa...
BackgroundIn the late 1990’s, before Facebook (2006), YouTube (2005) andWikipedia (2001), use of the internet in schools w...
Background II           CIPA and E-rate“Schools and libraries subject to CIPA may not receive thediscounts offered by the ...
Background III interpretation by HIDOEIn the absence of educational leadership in the HIDOEconversant with the growing and...
Background IVinterpretation by the HIDOE NSSB contracted a private vendor, Websense, to provide content-filtering for the d...
criteria for an effective       policy changea policy change ought to meet the following minimum criteria:1) It must compl...
Policy Optionsthe so-called Zero Option:  assumes that mechanisms exist within the present policy  structure to mitigate t...
Policy Options IIthe Zero Option is not appropriate since repeated efforts byschools, individuals, and even a State Senato...
proposed policy change IA successful policy alternative will most likely be one that retains a levelof system-wide content...
proposed policy change IIA group exists in each school for eliciting information from all segmentsof the school-community....
QUESTIONS?
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

Unintended Consequences: Content-Filtering Policy in the HIDOE

495 views

Published on

A presentation that accompanies a policy analysis of content filtering policies in the public schools.

  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

Unintended Consequences: Content-Filtering Policy in the HIDOE

  1. 1. Unintended Consequences t h e l o c a l i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f f e d e r a l p o l i c y - c o n t e n tf i l t e r i n g p o l i c y i n H a w a i i p u b l i c s c h o o l s
  2. 2. Unintended Consequences t h e l o c a l i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f f e d e r a l p o l i c y - c o n t e n tf i l t e r i n g p o l i c y i n H a w a i i p u b l i c s c h o o l s
  3. 3. AbstractIn the absence of leadership in the Hawaii Department of Education with requisitetechnological expertise to understand the changes in learning, teaching and society thathave occurred between the late 1990’s and the present with regard to internet access anduse, the responsibility for developing, implementing and enforcing content-access policiesmade necessary by FCC E-rate requirements under the Children’s Internet Protection Actwas left to office workers who are not educators. The result is content-filtering andcontent-access policies that do not serve the needs of students or teachers in a twenty-firstcentury learning environment. This paper examines the problem, the background, andproposes possible policy change alternatives.
  4. 4. the ProblemA student in AP Chem takes her laptop to the School Libraryand attempts to view a video podcast of a Chemistry 1A lecturefrom UC Berkeley via iTunesU - she cannotA high school Psychology teacher wants to project a video ofPiaget working with children from YouTube.Edu to herclassroom SMARTboard. - she cannotA 12th grade AP Gov student wants to research and present tohis class information about how local candidates use SocialMedia to reach voters - he cannot in Hawaii’s public schools
  5. 5. The Problem II17 and 18 year-old high school students and adult teachers arerestricted in access to the internet at the same level as arekindergarteners and first gradersdecisions regarding content filtering policies were not made byoperational “policy-makers” (Superintendent and Ass’tSuperintendent level) but by office workers who are noteducatorsHIDOE content filtering policies were created in response to adecade-old federal law and have not changed with the changingrealities of teaching and learning in the 21st century
  6. 6. BackgroundIn the late 1990’s, before Facebook (2006), YouTube (2005) andWikipedia (2001), use of the internet in schools was notcommonplaceMedia coverage of the perils awaiting children in “chat-rooms”and prevalence of internet pornography encouraged theintroduction in 1999 and passage of S 97 IS, the Children’sInternet Protection Act (CIPA)Federal funding of school technology through E-rate was tied tothe provisions of CIPA
  7. 7. Background II CIPA and E-rate“Schools and libraries subject to CIPA may not receive thediscounts offered by the E-rate program unless they certifythat they have an Internet safety policy that includestechnology protection measures. The protection measuresmust block or filter Internet access to pictures that are: (a)obscene, (b) child pornography, or (c) harmful to minors (forcomputers that are accessed by minors). Before adopting thisInternet safety policy, schools and libraries must providereasonable notice and hold at least one public hearing ormeeting to address the proposal.”
  8. 8. Background III interpretation by HIDOEIn the absence of educational leadership in the HIDOEconversant with the growing and changing role of digitaltechnology in teaching and learning as well as the changingimpact of the internet on children and society: responsibility for compliance with CIPA/E-rate was delegated to workers in the HIDOE Network Services and Support Branch (NSSB) there are no educators currently working in this branch and the Chief Information Officer for the HIDOE is not an educator (the Superintendent of HIDOE is also not an educator)
  9. 9. Background IVinterpretation by the HIDOE NSSB contracted a private vendor, Websense, to provide content-filtering for the domain k12.hi.us content-filtering policies go far beyond the intent of the original statute and hinder the ability of teachers to teach and students to learn in a 21st century educational environment
  10. 10. criteria for an effective policy changea policy change ought to meet the following minimum criteria:1) It must comply with Federal law.2) It must reasonably address the duty of care of the school to the child.3) It should support the HIDOE General Learner Outcomes by helping children in schoolsbecome effective and ethical users of contemporary technologies.4) It needs to take into account the needs of educators and students in a twenty-first centurylearning environment as well as provide for the concerns of the other stake-holders.5) It should be economically feasible. Implementation of the policy alternative should notplace an undue burden on schools or the Department.
  11. 11. Policy Optionsthe so-called Zero Option: assumes that mechanisms exist within the present policy structure to mitigate the problems of the current policy situationno system-wide policy eliminate system-wide content filtering and make compliance with FCC/E-rate the responsibility of individual schools
  12. 12. Policy Options IIthe Zero Option is not appropriate since repeated efforts byschools, individuals, and even a State Senator have not resultedin any substantive change and students and teachers in schoolshave gone to great lengths to find ways around HIDOE policyin their efforts to provide a 21st century educationalenvironment.the elimination of system-wide filtering policies is also not viabledue to the requirements of federal law and the duty-of-care ofthe Department to take reasonable efforts to provide for thesafety and security of children in its charge
  13. 13. proposed policy change IA successful policy alternative will most likely be one that retains a levelof system-wide content-filtering that is consistent with the requirementsof CIPA/E-rate.At the school-level, filtering models and software will be made availableand in consultation with educators, determinations will need to be madeabout how to frame a policy of progressively greater access andresponsibility.Questions will need to be posed and answered about what is age-appropriate for a first-grader to access, what is appropriate for a high-school student in a university-level class to access, and what tools shouldteachers have available.
  14. 14. proposed policy change IIA group exists in each school for eliciting information from all segmentsof the school-community. School-Community Councils should be part ofthe conversation regarding Internet access in the schools.Additionally, teachers will need to become more informed and educatedregarding the world of twenty-first century digital natives (students) andwill need the guidance of Administrators who are also aware of therealities of legal requirements, budgetary constraint, and pedagogicalappropriateness.Finally, there must be a greater transparency between the people and theoffices that exist to support teaching and learning in the schools and theend-users who provide students with the skills, aptitudes and habits ofmind they will need to be successful in the world in which they will liveand work.
  15. 15. QUESTIONS?

×