In what ways can larger school districts balance security with accessiblity?

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by John Krueger on January 6, 2009 at 1:34pm

This is an important topic. I'm having my ning site blocked at a nearby school and I am furious. Are there any solutions? Thanks!

-John

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Steve O'Connor on January 6, 2009 at 2:29pm

We have iPrism at our school. It can be configured to unblock any given site. The admin can also choose categories to block or not.

Talk to the folks in charge and make your case for specific sites.

Another strategy I have used is to use free and open source equivalents on rented server space. Generally speaking, filters do not block these.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Dave MacLean on January 6, 2009 at 6:52pm

I feel the only way to combat this problem is to demonstrate that the vast majority of students use the internet for positive reasons. I have recently joined the CORE TECH committee in my district and we are grappling with this issue. My stance is that we should be treating our virtual access the same way we treat our real access. When a student goes on a fieldtrip to the museum, we don't just take a six year old to the front door and say "go have fun" watch out for bad stuff. But nor do we block and lock the doors. We guide, facilitate and lead students through the experience. I feel that one of the major issues that we face is that many of the powers that be do not fully understand the potential of networking sites. Ignorance causes mistrust and mistrust leads to fear. Fear leads to blocking and filtering. We need to educate. I have been playing at how to approach this topic with my students. I have started a wiki @ www.digitalcitizenproject.wikispaces.com. I am currently setting up the framework and it is in its total infancy both as an idea and as a product. Check it out and join in creating it. Let's empower students (especially young students) to take back the net so that they can use it for their learning without the impediments of filters.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Dave MacLean on January 13, 2009 at 5:54pm

Your context must be a lot different from mine. My staff are prolific users of digital technology. The use is embedded in the daily lessons. We do not have labs in our schools. We have wireless lap top carts that can be used by any student at any time. Students have been introduced to the concept of responsible use of the internet right from Kindergarten. They have been educated about stranger danger, just like we teach for the real world. No one is saying jump into the lions cage without training or defenses. I am suggesting that we teach children to understand the lion and its tendencies so that they can navigate the cage safely.

Our gr. 4-7 students are well versed in malware, zombies, viruses and the perils of predator behaviour on social networks. They are often more protective of their profiles than most adults. Their generation has a greater understanding of their digital footprint than most teenagers. They are probably more educated on the responsible use social networks than most adults.

The teacher picks the museum, the administrator trusts his/her staff, the board trusts their administrators. I know it is a difficult concept to grasp for those who are still working on the concept of professional trust. We are just in different contexts.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Marty Caise on January 7, 2009 at 2:05pm

I think you need to promote this by making it successful in a much more controlled environment. Especially when we talk about K-8 and conceptual learning about Web 2.0 resources. We use filters in our district and iPrism was one of them. Provisions can be made to open them up but due to the CIPA concerns and more importantly parental apprehension about their students collaborating with those outside the confinds of the school, IT support groups are unwilling to open this up without administrative support.

I would suggest using Web 2.0 resources in a much more controlled environment. Using learning management systems like Moodle would be a good start. Moodle provides Web 2.0 resources and is free to use. Your cost will come in with hardware, installation and support. (My blog entry on this subject)

Once you have shown both the IT group and upper adminstrators the success of your learning initiative with Web 2.0 in addition to communicating with the parents (through an AUP which defines use of Web 2.0 and it's resources), unblocking Web 2.0 content can be looked at as the instructional tool you want it to be.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Dave MacLean on January 7, 2009 at 4:46pm

The whole point is that the controlled environment is an artificial one. As soon as students exit the school confines and go home to their completely unfiltered and predominantly unsupervised digital world they lose the "safety" of filters. I would suggest that the filters are not there to protect students but rather to protect districts from the possible headaches that they would have to face because the 5% of students who will abuse the freedom. The conversation reminds me of when we, as policy makers, debated whether condoms should be made available in highschool washrooms.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Dave MacLean on January 13, 2009 at 6:00pm

Now your talking. Lets blow up the idea of the confining institution we call school. Let us teach by letting kids do stuff. They'll do stuff they actually care about. What a novel idea.

As for my naivety. I'll take that as a compliment. For if being wise means that I stifle real learning with a conventional education system that was designed for an industrial revolution that is so far passed its expiry date that it smells like stale thoughts, I don't want to be wise.

It takes a community to raise a child. It is a sad thought that our role as educational facilitators ends when the 3pm bell rings.

Your last comment says it all. Thanks for your input.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Dave MacLean on January 13, 2009 at 9:45pm

First off, I am the building administrator. I am a strong proponent of teacher autonomy. When it comes to staff supervision, my job is to hire, support, empower and evaluate teachers. It is my job to establish a culture of trust that allows teachers to do their job without the impediments of checking in with me for every little detail. In an environment that encourages teachers to use the internet to extend the learning, to grasp the teachable moment and to take the tangent that empowers students to go deeper with their learning, there is no time to have to jump through red tape that implies that I do not trust their professional judgement. Often IT people may be "technology" experts but they are rarely "education" experts and who are they to judge the relevance of a particular website. In addition, this model encourages levels of control that often get politicized. Not to mention that many of my teachers are technological experts, especially when it comes to pedagogical uses.

As I mentioned in my past reply, our contexts are different. All but one of my classes are involved with ePals in some sort of international curriculum sharing (i.e. tracking weather around the world with our gr. 1 class). In addition, we have three classes using wikis to collectively research math concepts, the life cycle of salmon, cultural aspects of First Nation life. In addition, we have just started to explore digital citizenship with a wiki and are using Kiva.org to make a difference in the world. We have a class blog that tracks the progress of our salmon raising experience and our teachers use facebook to communicate with a number of our parents and students around several group projects. Some students are using Skype and/or iChat to interview their peers in other parts of Canada to add to their country study. (just to name a few web2.0 uses in the school). The only issue is that our teachers are using their home computers to do some of these activities outside of class time because our district has blocked Facebook and some of the other web 2.0 applications that teachers want to use.

The compromise that is being discussed right now involves progressive permissions. Whereby, our network will run a series of tests on any device seeking access to the network and as it determines various levels of security, the prohibitive filters and blockages dissipate. While this is a step in the right direction, I still don't think it provides teachers with the autonomy that they require to use the internet in a seamless manner.

Finally, a district fails in the eyes of a parent group when it fails to educate its clients. An informed and involved parent group is part of the solution rather than legal complainants. Almost all of our digital issues originate from a home computer and then spill over into the school. Very rarely is the reverse true. Parents need to be partners in guiding their children around the net so it is incumbent on us to involve and educate our parents.

And by the way, I have much love for the professionals who support our school. They help us play with learning in ways that engage students and make their work relevant. We are lucky that we don't need their permission to do this in the ways we want to. They see their role as removers of barriers and do so without questions or judgement. When someone takes advantage of this culture, I am sure they will be dealt with in the same manner we deal with any employee who acts in an unprofessional manner. But I'll be damned if one bad apple becomes the cause of a blanket policy of a security state.

• ▶ Reply