Previous by DateNext by Date Date Index
Previous by ThreadNext 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
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-

LM_NET Mailing List Home