Hi all,
Based on the comments I got back on what I said about filtering, I have
focused on this more strongly in my presentation notes for COSN. Here
they are:
Filtering
(J)ust as access to ideas makes it possible for citizens generally to
exercise their rights of free speech and press in a meaningful manner,
such access prepares students for active participation in the
pluralistic, of the contentious society in which they will soon be adult
members. Pico v Island Trees
Legitimate Educational Reasons
School officials can control what students can and cannot access while
at school ~ and on the Internet.
Based on legitimate educational reasons.
But they may not place restrictions grounded in viewpoint discrimination.
The Problem
School officials are not making the blocking decisions.
Filtering companies are:
Not held publicly accountable.
Block controversial material.
Block appropriate material in categories with objectionable material.
Protect what they block as a trade secret.
Civil Rights
Schools cannot discriminate based on race, religion, sex, disability.
The operation of the filter must not block access in a discriminatory
manner.
Non-traditional religion in “new age” or “occult” categories.
Sexual orientation information for teens in categories with adult material.
Statutory Immunity
Schools have statutory immunity if a student accesses material placed
online by a third party.
Section 230 of the Computer Decency Act specifically states “educational
institutions.”
Schools do not have to worry about being sued if a student accidentally
or intentionally accesses something bad!
CIPA
Children’s Internet Protection Act requires use of a technology
protection device to block visual depictions of:
Obscene material.
Child pornography.
Material harmful to minors (sexual material).
FCC regulations state: does not expect that filters will block all
objectionable material.
Filter as Management
Technology services departments are trying to use filters as an overall
management tool.
Blocking many categories in an attempt to limit different kinds of misuse.
Is not working effectively for Web 1.0.
Will never work effectively for Web 2.0.
Constitutionality of CIPA
Assuming 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. United States v. ALA
“ease”
In most districts, getting an override is not easy.
“need only ask a librarian to unblock it”
Did not say “head librarian,” “committee of librarians,” “technology
services department.”
Technology services personnel do NOT have the expertise to determine the
appropriateness of material for students.
Bypassing
Students can easily bypass the filter.
Search for “bypass Internet filter.”
Bypass technologies were developed for the benefit of the dissidents in
Asia and Middle East.
Technologies can be expected to improve.
Approaches that filtering companies are using to try to defeat bypassing
is resulting in more overblocking.
Filtering is THE Problem
Filtering is preventing teachers and students from effectively using
Internet resources.
Causing massive waste of resources
Speak Up survey.
43% of students (6-12 grade) report their technology use is impeded by
the ever present school filters or firewalls which block access to
websites they need.
In Sum
CIPA only requires blocking pornography.
CIPA requires the ability to override the filter to be considered
constitutional.
Schools cannot be held liable if mistakes are made and students access
objectionable material.
And they will not lose E-Rate funding.
The inability of teachers and students to access instructional material
online is a major barrier.
There are NO BARRIERS whatsoever to allowing all instructional staff to
immediately override the filter to provide access.
Filters are not an effective tool to prevent misuse in Web 1.0 or 2.0.
Strategies to prevent misuse will require a shift to more effective
supervision and monitoring.
Also, the more exciting and relevant the instructional activities are,
the less students will engage in misuse or support misuse by other students.
I am going to put this into a more extensive memo.
Nancy
--
Nancy Willard, M.S., J.D.
Center for Safe and Responsible Internet Use
http://csriu.org
nwillard@csriu.org
--------------------------------------------------------------------
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/
--------------------------------------------------------------------
LM_NET
Mailing List Home