Students on the Internet: Can You Ensure Appropriate Access?

Schools Turn m Acceptable Use Policies and Filtering Devices to Address Parental Concerns

Schools across the country are connecting their students to the Internet to learn about almost any subject imaginable. With a few clicks of a mouse, students can access images and text that can inform, enlighten--and sometimes disturb.

So with this powerful new technology come concerns about its acceptable use. What should schools allow? What responsibilities do students, parents, teachers, and administrators have?

School leaders and boards of education in some communities already were raising these questions when Time magazine turned up the heat on the discussion last summer. By spotlighting the easy access to pornographic images on the Internet in a cover story on "cyberporn," the news weekly caused anxiety among plenty of school district administrators.

Time could not have printed a more provocative article about an undergraduate research paper that portrayed the Internet as a den of iniquity. The study's author, Martin Rimm, a Carnegie Mellon University student, claimed to have found more than 900,000 pornographic images on the Internet.

Cyberporn Debate

Senators Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, and James Exon, D-Neb., sounded the alarm in Congress before experienced Internet users inside and outside education could point out the egregious errors in Rimm's facts and reasoning. His study cited as authorities people who sharply disagreed with his methods. Other researchers called his work deeply flawed and unprofessional.

Nevertheless, Congress recently approved a Communications Decency Act, as part of the sweeping Telecommunications Act of 1996, that criminalizes the act of making pornography available to anyone under 18 through the Internet. The new legislation also holds harmless any educational institution that provides students with Internet access.

Meanwhile, states appear to be largely undeterred by the pornography scare and the threat of congressional restrictions. Massachusetts Governor William Weld filed a $60 million education technology bond bill in October that would provide "central network resources so that local schools can communicate with other schools, with state education agencies, and with the entire world across the Internet." The governor's principal concern was not the threat of pornography but the prospect that Massachusetts would lag behind the rest of the nation in applying technology to the education of its students.

With their states' blessings, educators at the district level have been forging ahead with Internet plans. More than two years ago, the Monroe County, Ind., schools hosted a strategic planning session where the school district, the local chamber of commerce, and Bloomington city officials identified the Internet and the World Wide Web as appropriate educational resources, according to Carl Zager, instructional technology coordinator for the Monroe County Community Schools.

Public discussion of the school district's plans and general news media coverage of student access have been positive, if somewhat cautious. "Horror stories and negative influences" received some attention, which tempered the generally positive tone of the community's response, Zager says.

Public discussions about what constitutes acceptable use of the Internet have made educators and community members feel more confident that the Internet is a positive educational force. If anything, Zager says, the Internet has forced Monroe County educators to look for teachable moments about responsibility, harassment, fraud, con artistry, and the need to exercise good judgment.

That's the tact being taken in Bend, Ore., at the Bend Community School, where board member Barbara Casey says students must spend about 90 minutes of class time early in the school year to discuss responsible on-line use. Then students and parents are required to sign a pledge to abide by the rules.

"When we originally decided to have complete Internet access for our students it was with great trepidation because we live in a small, conservative community with very little technology in the schools," she says of the publicly funded, private school. "We shook in our boots for quite a while."

Reassuring Parents

Educators nationwide tend to agree on several points. First, the potential educational value of the Internet is immense. Second, the ready availability of pornography on the Internet only mirrors other aspects of American society, especially other forms of mass media. Finally, if one does not look for pornography on the Internet, one's chances of stumbling on it are slim.

The question facing school leaders is whether the latter point will provide cold comfort for parents who want to know if the Internet poses an unacceptable risk to their sons and daughters. Will this new technology corrupt our youth, perhaps even expose them to strangers bent on causing harm?

Parents may want to know whether open access also will expose their children to religious views radically different from their own and hate group propaganda.

To address those parental concerns, most school systems give parents the chance to opt in or out of Internet access. The Rogers, Ark., Public Schools are typical. "We give them the ability to say, 'Yes, I think it is worth the risk' or 'no, I don't want to take this chance.' Choice makes a big difference to most parents," says Gary Day, the district's technology director.

Other school districts such as Monroe County treat the Internet the same as any other information resource, whether a textbook, magazine, CD-ROM, or guest speaker. Each is evaluated on its merits and possible contribution to instruction and curriculum. "Attention and understanding will go much farther toward defusing the inappropriate than prohibition," says Zager.

School districts and boards of education nationwide tend to focus on the bright promise of the Internet, while exercising caution to avoid the pitfalls and darker corners of on-line access. The most commonly used measures to avoid trouble are acceptable use policies, board of education policies, and filters.

* Acceptable use policies

Acceptable use policies serve several purposes. Often adopted on a districtwide basis, they typically are intended to forestall parental complaints and to limit or remove the liability of public schools for any misuse by students. But they also emphasize the personal responsibility of students for their own actions. Under most policies, a parent and student must both sign a release form in order for the student to access the Internet using school facilities.

The 650-student Mayville Central Schools in a rural part of western New York state enacted an acceptable use policy that requires signatures of parents and students. (See related story, page 20.) Superintendent Don Belcer says the district enacted the measure in 1995 "more as a pro-active move than addressing a problem."

Acceptable use policies do not always help ease concerns of parents and community members about student encounters on the Internet.

In the Grand County, Utah, School District, Jolene Morris, the district's technology director, likens an acceptable use protocol to a "set of laws for driving a car--the laws say we can only drive at certain speeds, we must drive on the right side of the road, we must have a license, our car must be registered.

"But," she adds, "the thing that keeps us safe as a driver is not the list of rules, it's our training in defensive driving, our education on how to avoid accidents, and our skill in recognizing dangerous driving situations. We must never place too much emphasis on the acceptable use policy; rather, we must learn defensive Internet driving techniques."

The real benefit of such policies derives from the discussions they prompt at orientation meetings, Morris says. Often the public discussions help put concerns to rest. However, she cites two approaches that are even more valuable in making parents comfortable: (1) closely supervising students while they are on the Internet and (2) actively educating students to use the Internet responsibly.

In Pepperell, Mass., regional school board member Patricia Thorpe says parents never raised the issue of pornography when schools first received access to the World Wide Web, the popular array of home pages and information centers. From time to time, she says, some older residents questioned the need for access to new technology, citing how well they had coped without it. Still, the school board of the North Middlesex Regional District issued an acceptable use policy in 1993.

Phil Breen, math and technology coordinator for the Billerica, Mass., public schools, believes acceptable use policies are doing an adequate job. The Billerica system has 55 personal computers connected to the Internet with the terminals housed in two classrooms. Typically, one or two teachers or aides monitor usage, and the Internet is unavailable when no one is around to do so.

* School board policies

In Bellingham, Wash., a board of education policy covers "about 80 percent of the issues an acceptable use policy doesn't deal with," says Jamieson McKenzie, the school district's director of media and technology.

The problem, he says, is that acceptable use policies were originally written by computer network people to protect their networks. These policies are discipline-oriented rather than curriculum-oriented. As such, they miss the point that the Internet is "a whole new way for people to learn about their world" and needs to be integrated into the life of schools.

The Internet changes the flow of information, the job of teachers, and the role of students. It needs to be integrated into the rest of district policies relating to curriculum materials and how children learn, McKenzie says. Because restrictive measures raise issues of freedom of access to information, Internet use policies must be consistent with school library protocols and policies on censorship and exclusion of materials.

In his Internet newsletter entitled From Now On, McKenzie states that school board policies should describe what is considered appropriate student behavior, just as acceptable use policies do, but board policies connect these behavioral standards to the district's policies on student rights and responsibilities. They tie procedures and consequences to existing measures, such as school district policies on locker searches.

"A sound board policy takes a position on access to potentially controversial information" and relates to current curriculum policies, outlining clear expectations for staff supervising student use, McKenzie says. Policies also should outline staff responsibilities and rights as employees use the Internet.

McKenzie suggests an effective school board policy governing student access to the Internet should cover the following:

* Contact with objectionable material;

* Contact with questionable material;

* Contact with questionable persons;

* Objectionable behavior;

* Objectionable material;

* Destructive behavior;

* Violation of privacy rights; and

* Violation of access rights.

Unlike most school districts, the Bellingham district maintains two types of Internet access for students. Any student may have access under supervision. However, students receive independent and unrestricted access to the Internet only after filing a signed parental release form with school officials.

* Filters

The use of filters, also known as blocking software, by educators to screen inappropriate materials from students' eyes appears to be growing in popularity, fueled in part by the congressional debate over cyberporn.

Breen, in Billerica, Mass., says the appeal of filtering devices is understandable because when a school has 25 or more computers in a room, monitoring students' on-line activities can be difficult. The combination of a human monitor and a commercial software filter of inappropriate sites acknowledges the belief that "the average parent would want some control" over the kind of access their children have. The firm that supplies the screening software to Billerica's nine schools updates the filter every two weeks.

But Breen says he harbors doubts about using a filter. He is concerned about infringing on students' First Amendment rights. However, he says, "We felt it was worth making the effort to at least shield as much as we could that didn't seem to be proper."

Grand County, Utah, also uses filters to sift out sites on the World Wide Web that Utah's state Internet group has deemed unacceptable for K-12 students, Morris says. "But we don't tell students or parents about these filters--not because we want to hide the fact that we are censoring, but so that parents and students don't rely on the filters and think the Internet is so safe they don't need to take precautions."

In addition, she says, "as soon as we advertise that we filter our Internet access, we accept the liability of providing a 'safe' connection. Anyway, proxy filters are not completely effective--unacceptable files can be placed on non-filtered sites and become accessible regardless of a filter. Filters are very much like computer viruses--as soon as we find a way to filter a site, someone finds a way to get around the filter, so we need an upgraded filter, which someone will find a way to skirt."

But some school law experts contend blocking software does not nullify or supercede an acceptable use policy agreed to by students and parents. At the same time, school leaders must indicate through their acceptable use policies that while precautionary steps have been taken, the school cannot guarantee that a student will not encounter questionable material on the Internet.

Student Rights

Do filters of on-line information violate students' rights? Morris tries to answer that in terms already familiar to parents.

"When I'm asked by a parent how I'd define a pornographic file, I simply tell them that when I'm on duty in the technology center no picture is to be downloaded and/or displayed on the screen that does not adhere to school dress code," which bans bare midriffs and tank tops, says Morris.

The school district's dress code has been in place for a long time (even though she concedes some students could argue it violates their rights), Morris says, "so it's easy to define my personal values in terms of an accepted standard. Of course, I extend that relationship to our school's discipline policy--subject matter or abusive language that's not allowed in person in our classrooms is not allowed on the Internet when I'm on duty."

Grand County also randomly "filters" student e-mail. "All students are told that we check half a dozen messages a day. They know e-mail is not private--they know that even if we didn't check e-mail locally, it isn't entirely private out on the 'Net either," Morris says.

She says she has not received any complaints about undermining students' constitutional rights to free speech. During the Internet orientation, she makes it clear to students that using the Internet through the school's connection is a privilege, not a right.

The 1,600-student school district tries to convey the same message to parents, who must attend an Internet orientation with their children before the student can get an account. When the presentation turns to the "dark side" of the Internet, Morris relates the issue to family values. What some might consider pornographic, others might not.

"The final decision must rest on the student and his/her family values," she says. "We encourage and almost insist that students and parents go home after the Internet orientation and discuss family values. We also ask parents to reinforce the reasons for some of our rules."

Steven Collins, webmaster of Web 66, a World Wide Web site based at the University of Minnesota that maintains the most comprehensive list of schools and districts with web home pages, does not see reason for great concern about student access to the Internet. He claims the biggest threat is not student misuse or abuse but that "fear mongers will destroy the Internet. ... I couldn't imagine a safer place for kids to roam.

While Morris shares a concern about federal government infringement on Internet access and the need for schools to be proactive, she also advocates caution.

"I do not believe the Internet is the safest place for kids to roam. Like any place else in our world, there are inherent dangers, but we can be safe if we know the dangers. We're taught all our lives how to deal with poisons in the home, how to deal with strangers, how to protect ourselves in automobiles-we just need to learn the dangers of the Internet, then relax and enjoy."

Robert Sanchez is a free-lance writer on education and technology in Billerica, Mass.

One School Districts Internet Policy

The School Administrator put out a call on the Internet recently to ask school district leaders to send copies of their rules governing student access to cyberspace using school equipment.

Don Belcer, superintendent in Mayville, N.Y., a rural district with 700 students, was one who shared a district's acceptable use policy for the Internet. The policy is typical of many received. Belcer said it was adopted by the school board "as a proactive move," not as a result of a problem.

A student and a parent must sign an agreement pledging to abide by the rules before the student is granted computer access.

The policy reads as follows:

"The board of education considers a computer network to be a valuable tool for education and encourages the use of computers and computer-related technology in district classrooms. The district now has the ability to enhance students' education through the use of computers on the Local Area Network and the Internet.

"Students and all district users of this technology have the responsibility to use this educational opportunity properly in accordance with the rules of the district. All users must comply with the following:

1. All uses of the network and the Internet must be in support of education and consistent with the purposes of Mayville Central School District.

2. Network accounts are to be used only by the authorized owner of the account. The sharing of passwords is absolutely prohibited.

3. Any violations of the use of the network and the Internet should be reported to the teacher in charge.

4. The teacher in charge must approve the use of personal disks on the network computers.

5. Personal information about oneself should not be shared over the Internet.

6. Use of the network to access or process inappropriate materials or to download files dangerous to the integrity of the network is prohibited. Transmission of material, information, or software in violation of any district policy or federal, state or local law or regulation is prohibited.

7. Network users identifying a security problem on the district system must notify the teacher in charge. Do not demonstrate the problem to anyone.

8. Network users may download materials for their own use. Copyrighted materials must be used in accordance with district policy and applicable law.

9. Vandalism will result in cancellation of system use privileges. Vandalism is defined as a malicious attempt to harm or destroy district equipment or materials, that of another user or of the district system or the Internet system."

Further Advice on Internet Resources

Educators can find plenty of useful resources on this subject by doing some on-line exploration. Here are some sites to check out on the World Wide Web, as well as through gopher and file transfer protocol.

* For suggestions about creating acceptable use policies:

http://www.wentworth.com/classroom/aup.htm

* For sample policies:

gopher://ericir.syr.edu/11/Guides

gopher://riceinfo.rice.edu:1170/00/More/Acceptable/fla

* For a list of frequently asked questions about acceptable use policies compiled by Classroom Connect, the educational Internet division of Wentworth Worldwide Media Inc.:

ftp://ftp.classroom.net

* For suggestions about creating school board policies:

From Now On at http://www.pacificrim.net/[sim]mckenzie, then select "past issues" (May 1995)

* For information about child safety on the Internet, acceptable and unacceptable use, and censorship:

http://www.voicenet.com/[sim]cranmer/censorship.html

http://www.uoknor.edu/oupd/kidsafe/start.htm