[LM_NET] Operation Delete Internet Fear - DOJ controlled curriculum

[Nancy Willard <nwillard@CSRIU.ORG>]

This email gets to the heart of why H R 3630 and S 1047 are so wrong.

As I said before, it is very important that schools provide universal
digital safety and literacy education. This is now required under CIPA.

As you make plans to provide this education, it is very important to have
the appropriate staff members involved. This includes educational
technology, librarians, health teachers, counselors, and school resource
officers. I will set forth an overview of the issues I believe need to be
taught below. As you can see, they cross a spectrum of issues. Ed tech staff
can address foundational issues and the technical issues. Librarians are the
masters in the area of literacy. But please neither of you should be trying
to teach about risky sexual behavior, aggression, unsafe communities, and
dangerous groups. This is outside of your basic expertise.

Also, unfortunately at this time much of what is available to schools could
be characterized as Reefer Madness - Just Say "No" instruction -
authoritarian delivery of inaccurate fear-based messages and simplistic
rules against normative online behavior. Watch out for any material provided
by an organization that has been funded by DOJ and the materials provided by
your state AGs. Essentially if it resembles the original DARE please do not
use it. Please ask the providers for the research they have based their
instruction on - as well as the risk prevention approach used.

Here is why this is exceptionally important. The Speak Up folks have told me
that students have told them that after teachers are taught about Internet
safety they RESTRICT student Internet activities even more. THE REEFER
MADNESS JUST SAY NO INTERNET SAFETY EDUCATION IS INTERFERING WITH THE
TRANSITION TO 21ST CENTURY SCHOOLS!!!!!

I am very concerned that the implementation of the new CIPA Internet safety
education requirement will push us back in our efforts to effectively
prepare students for their future. If you are forced by your school
leadership to use any of these kinds of materials, please create a brief
follow-up survey to assess whether this is happening.

As I noted, according to Rep Wasserman Schultz: "Our bill will establish a
competitive grant program so that non-profit Internet safety organizations
can work together with schools and communities to educate students,
teachers, and parents about these online dangers."

Do we want the federal government, DOJ specifically, controlling the
creation to curriculum and provision of professional development?

Interestingly, there is a statute against this. 20 U.S.C. § 3403 (b)
provides that the U.S. Department of Education may not ³exercise any
direction, supervision, or control over the curriculum, program of
instruction, ... of any educational institution, school, or school system,
... or over the selection or content of library resources, textbooks, or
other instructional materials by any educational institution or school
system. ...² 

Given these statutory restrictions on the U.S. DOE, which at the very least
has employed individuals with expertise in instruction, does it make any
sense to authorize the U.S. DOJ to do this?

If some organizations receive federal funding for curriculum creation,
wouldn't this then allow them to create the impression that their curriculum
has been endorsed by the federal government?

Don't think this will not happen. It already has.
http://www.isafe.org/channels/sub.php?ch=ai&sub_id=1. "In 2002, the i-SAFE
Safe Schools Education Initiative and Outreach Campaign received bi-partisan
recognition and support from both the Senate and the House of
Representatives. Since that date, i-SAFE has been awarded federal funding
from the United States Congress to fulfill its mission and goal."

Congressionally endorsed curriculum. Sends chills.

There are other reasons why DOJ should not be authorized to have this kind
of control:

1. The material they have on their own sites - and in the resources that are
provided by many state AGs who are part of the Internet Crimes Against
Children program - is INACCURATE. Look here:
http://www.fbi.gov/page2/sept04/cac090104.htm. This is inaccurate
information. I am not the only one who says this is inaccurate. The ICAC
technical advisory group, Crimes Against Children Research Center says this
is inaccurate. http://www.unh.edu/ccrc/internet-crimes/. "The  publicity
about online ³predators² who prey on naive children using trickery  and
violence is largely inaccurate." And how are you going to implement Web 2.0
instruction if the FBI is telling people that it is dangerous for young
people to post any personal information online and that they are at high
risk of online predators? They are not, btw. Recent research indicates the
arrests in this area are about 1% of all arrests for sexual abuse of minors.
These are teens who knowingly meet with adults for sex. Many appear to have
been seeking such engagement.

2. The U.S. DOJ ³mental paradigm² tends to see ³crime² where it does not
exist. A disturbing example is demonstrated on this page:
http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/ovc/publications/bulletins/internet_2_2001/internet
_2_01_6.html. Here DOJ describes teens who send unwanted sexual messages of
a sexual nature as "predators" and "offenders." Consider how many
"predators" you have stalking the halls of your high schools.

3. The U.S. DOJ has further demonstrated inadequacy in reviewing the
effectiveness of the curriculum it has funded. In an evaluation of the U.S.
DOJ-funded curriculum produced by I-Safe conducted by the National Institute
of Justice, <http://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/213715.pdf>, the
evaluators asked pre and post evaluation questions such as: ³How much do you
know about cyber bullying?² And ³How much do you know about Internet
predators?² With the available responses being: ³Nothing at all.  A little.
Some. A lot.² This is clearly not effective evaluation of instruction.

And yet DOJ, based on this study, calls this program "effective."
http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/nij/topics/crime-prevention/school-safety/effective
-programs.htm. "The evidence showed that I-SAFE effectively increased
children¹s knowledge about Internet safety." Say what?!

And about your expertise. I just received a copy of the letter endorsing
this legislation that has been signed by some of the DOJ-funded Internet
safety organizations. Here is what they say about you: "Indeed, federal law
currently requires schools receiving E-Rate funding to provide Internet
safety education to students.  ... State and local agencies place the
majority of responsibility of teaching Internet safety on educators who are
simply unprepared to provide this education."

I do not view educators as "simply unprepared." I think there is some
additional information you and other teachers need in order to teach these
issues accurately - primarily addressing the misinformation you have
received. My soon-to-be-released professional development materials (that
have been developed without DOJ funds) should accomplish this in about 2
hours. Also, I have spoken to many high school students about their online
practices and it is my opinion that they have a high degree of understanding
about safe and responsible online practices.

So, I rest my case (as I used to say as an attorney). The idea of DOJ
funding the creation of yet more such curriculum is deeply disturbing.

I have tried to make each of these messages helpful. The following is the
list of competencies that the material I am creating addresses:

Digital Media Safety, Citizenship, and Literacy

Core Competencies (all teachers)
Critical thinking using digital media.
Information credibility.
Keeping life in balance.
Protecting personal information and reputation.
Interacting safely with others online.

Sites and Technologies (ed tech)
Computer security and scams.
Terms of use agreements.
Accidental access to objectionable material.
Protection of privacy and empowered consumption.
Protections when social networking.

Youth Risk Online (health, counselors, school resource officers)
Cyberbullying and cyberthreats.
Risky sexual relationships and activities.
Unsafe or dangerous online groups.

Digital Media Literacy (librarians and all teachers)
Free speech.
Accurate attribution.
Copyright and fair use.
Publisher responsibilities.
Establishing credibility and effective advocacy.
Civic collaboration.

There is a conference starting today, the Family Online Safety Institute.
Senator Menendez is reportedly presenting, as well as the staff person for
Rep Wasserman Schultz. I have been encouraging these people to shift this
legislation to provide funding for programs that are targeted to address
young people who are at greater risk. I should know soon whether they have
paid attention and have any inclination to do so. Depending on what happens,
I may need to ask you to communicate about these issues to Congress.

All best,

Nancy
  
-- 
Nancy Willard, M.S., J.D.
Center for Safe and Responsible Internet Use
http://csriu.org
http://cyberbully.org
http://cyber-safe-kids.com
http://csriu.wordpress.com
nwillard@csriu.org

Cyberbullying and Cyberthreats: Responding to the Challenge of Online Social
Aggression, Threats, and Distress (Research Press)

Cyber-Safe Kids, Cyber-Savvy Teens: Helping Young People Learn to Use the
Internet Safely and Responsibly (Jossey-Bass)

--------------------------------------------------------------------
Please note: All LM_NET postings are protected by copyright law.
  You can prevent most e-mail filters from deleting LM_NET postings
  by adding LM_NET@LISTSERV.SYR.EDU to your e-mail address book.
To change your LM_NET status, you send a message to: listserv@listserv.syr.edu
In the message write EITHER:
1) SIGNOFF LM_NET
2) SET LM_NET NOMAIL
3) SET LM_NET MAIL
4) SET LM_NET DIGEST

 * LM_NET Help & Information: http://lmnet.wordpress.com/
 * LM_NET Archive: http://www.eduref.org/lm_net/archive/
 * EL-Announce with LM_NET Select: http://lm-net.info/join.html
 * LM_NET Supporters: http://lmnet.wordpress.com/category/links/el-announce/

--------------------------------------------------------------------