Previous by Date | Next by Date | Date Index
Previous by Thread | Next by Thread
| Thread Index
| LM_NET
Archive
| |
Last October, I, the Plaintiff in the Hicks v. Usd 470 "school library internet" case once again offered to settle the case for just legal fees and expenses totalling $95,200 after taxes and legal fees (what is three years of one's life worth?) (how about one's reputation and name?). USD 470 of Arkansas City, Kansas REJECTED the offer and filed a twenty page counterclaim petition in federal court. The Defendants deny any wrongdoing and responsibility. Based on their past actions and behavior, their refusal of accepting responsibility and being in denial was hardly a surprise. Evidently, what happened to me was the result of "persons unknown" or, as the cause of the 18 minute gap in the Watergate tape, some "sinister" force. Perhaps, the Central Office secretaries were running the district! USD 470 continue to adhere to a "zero" tolerance towards a school librarian visiting one, ten, or fifty sexually explicit websites (in my case five on a three year old computer). There are NO academic, professional, or educational reasons why a school librarian should ever have to visit a pornographic website. Evaluating and analyzing student accessibility, Reviewing how deep into such websites a student can visit without a membership, inservicing faculty and administration as to the content and accessibility of such websites, evaluating suspicious urls found on student accessible computers, analyzing referred websites in the professional literature such as whitehouse. com, evaluating porn websites for discussion among librarians and at faculty meetings, and testing trial filters (in my case two) are NOT legitimate reasons or "appropriate" uses of school computers. There are no exceptions. Merely the presence of pornographic websites on a librarian's computer indicates "inappropriate" use. My admission of having visited such websites simply confirms my guilt. Since no appropriate or professional reasons as to why a librarian would ever have to visit X rated exists, the librarian's motives must be perverted and reasons can only be prurient. Hence, the conclusion of the USD 470 that I am a "voyeur" which is only one step above a child molester! Naturally, characteristics such as being male and single suggest I fit the sexual pervert profile. Unfortunately, USD 470 has a minor problem and dilemma. Internet and/or computer usage are NOT mentioned in Board policy, the "Faculty Handbook", the negotiated "Master Agreement", or the board adopted "Library Media Center Policies and Procedures" manual. When the Board Of Education and Central Office administration decided to install an "unfiltered" internet first in the high school library and later throughout the district including the elementary schools, they forgot or failed to consider adopting any internet/computer usage guidelines for USD 470 employees. Although a "student" AUP requiring both student and parent/guardian signatures was adopted, the absence of either a "faculty" AUP, or any internet usage definition or "inservice" was, based on their above belief pertaining to a librarian and the internet in his/her library, definitely a serious oversight by the Board and district authorities. However, adopted Board policy does have the traditional "morals" clause which states: "The superintendent may suspend an employee for any one or more of the following reasons: alleged violation of board policy, rule, or regulation; the filing of a formal complaint against the employee with any civil authority or with the board charging the employee with the alleged commission of an offense INVOLVING MORAL TURPITUDE [my capitals]; and other just cause." (GBK-R) Consequently, since the board members and administration believe and accept the premise that a librarian, regardless of the reasons, visiting pornographic websites is committing an immoral act or offense, the "moral turpitude" clause is compatible and sufficient justification for the alleging "inappropriate use of Internet on school premises". Although "Hicks v. USD 470" involves numerous "librarianship" issues and principles, the district's above position restricts, censors, impairs, and redefines the role, responsibilities, and job of a librarian especially in relation to the necessary reviewing, evaluating, familiarizing, and mastering the content, accessibility and usage of a collection's. When a concerned parent tells the librarian how graphic the pornography is, how easily accessible it is, and whether you, librarian, are aware or realize how bad it is, what do you say? According to USD 470, the librarian must say, "Because the district prohibits me from viewing or visiting such websites, I haven't personal knowledge of student accessibility or their content. However, I have read about such sites." Just as importantly, the district's position of mandating a librarian from being able to read, view, and evaluate certain specified parts or dimensions of the text and pictures of a "resource" present in the library seriously undermines and compromises academic and intellectual freedom. Other than Defendant and librarian Nancy Horner, do any other librarians agree with USD 470's "internet" usage policy? Do any librarians disagree that their policy should be challenged? If you interested in remaining informed with the "Hicks v. USD 470" case and haven't yet visited my website, please do. I am and will try to keep it updated as to the progress of what I think is an important case involving the issues and problems facing a 21st century librarian. All court documents and newspaper/magazine articles are available on the website. Yes, I am aware of the associated press and CNN reporting on the case. Again, I want to thank you, my fellow librarians, for your emails, interest, and continued support. Although the case will continue to be an ordeal, you and this listserv help make it worthwhile. http://www.hicksvusd470.com Bob Hicks still high school librarian Arkansas City, KS aknaten@webtv.net PINING FOR NEFERTITI =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-==-=-=- All LM_NET postings are protected by copyright law. To change your LM_NET status, e-mail 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 * Allow for confirmation. LM_NET Help & Information: http://ericir.syr.edu/lm_net/ Archive: http://askeric.org/Virtual/Listserv_Archives/LM_NET.shtml LM_NET Select/EL-Announce: http://www.cuenet.com/archive/el-announce/ LM_NET Supporters: http://ericir.syr.edu/lm_net/ven.html =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-