TQ#10 - Consider what you've learned about open source technologies, cloud computing, and videoconferencing. In three-to-five paragraphs, share what is new for you and how it might (or might not) fit in the school technology plan. Remember to review and comment on the blog postings of your colleagues.
It is hard for me to talk about any of these topics being new for me. I have been aware of them for some time and our district does use some of these items today. I think for my response, I will discuss how we are using them.
Open source has come along way in the last few years. It still amazes me that most users just think that open source means free software. Many have no idea that the real meaning is that the code is free. Some open source software does need to be paid for! Our district uses a product called LetterGrade for our grading system. This system runs on two Red Hat Enterprise Linux servers (we paid about $500 each for the Red Hat Enterprise software with support). If you are aware of LetterGrade, you know that the original owner sold the company to a bigger company that shortly after went out of business. Since the code was open source, I was able to contract with an ex-employee of both companies to continue support. To my knowledge, we are the last district with a fully functional, running version of the product. In addition, we have changes made to the application 2 or 3 times a year.
Cloud computing is newer in our district and has only recently been introduced. Some of our middle school staff have been using Google docs with disadvantaged students that do not have updated computers at home. The students have been able to use Google docs as a method to get their classwork completed.
Colonial has been using video conferencing on Internet 2 for the last 4 years. We are now at the point where all 7 of our buildings have a video conference units, called a Polycoms, in their library. Our K-3 buildings are just getting used to being able to involve students from all 4 buildings in projects. In our high school and middle school, the students are able to experience outside events. The highlight for use was 2 years ago. Our middle school had a live video conference with a diver on the Great Barrier Reef in Australia. The conference started at 8pm and was attended by almost 50 students. The students interacted with the diver while they were being shown different types of marine life on the reef. It truly was a remarkable experience.
As you can see, Colonial is comfortable with many different types of emerging technologies. If you want a preview, search for Microsoft Surface. We are looking at getting one of these units for our Computer Science department.
Wednesday, November 5, 2008
TQ #9
Thoughtful Question #9 - The legality of law is determined by the court system which is frequently called upon to interpret laws that may violate the U.S. Constitution or that are not sufficiently detailed to clearly enforce. One principle that the courts may apply to these questions is that of the means of least restraint. In other words, the laws should be enforced with the least intrusion into traditional freedoms and liberties and the least disruption of the lives of people and institutions. In 3-to-5 paragraphs, discuss how these laws, and the policies that are developed to enforce the laws, should-or-should-not comply with the principle of least restraint. You should take a personal position here, as though you were a judge presiding over a challenge to the way a school or library has implemented a restrictive technology policy. An important consideration is that the laws are seldom clear, and that schools are given a wide range of possible ways to comply.
One area in relation to this topic that I feel strongly about is the proper use of content filters in a K-12 setting. I feel that I have a unique perspective on this topic as I was responsible for the management of the Content Filter at Colonial for the last six years. While content filters are required, the manner in which the filter is deployed are almost entirely up to the school district. The requirement states only that all users be monitored and that a filter is in place. Some districts will block almost everything in the hopes of having control. Districts subscribing to this method are in fantasy land. If you are looking for reality, you need to realize that this method only keeps you in the dark.
The majority of students in a high school environment know how to "get around" a filter. It usually involves using a proxy server that masks where you are going. To my knowledge, filters cannot stop this behavior, they can only stop access to a proxy site. That would be enough if new proxy servers didn't pop up online every day. In addition, users with just a bit of knowledge can make their home computer part of a proxy web if they know what they are doing.
So, how does this impact the district monitoring? Those responsible for monitoring activity will only see the proxy, they will not see that the student successfully got to MySpace. Let's explore this further. An incident happens and the school is contacted by the authorities. The authorities need to know if a student gained access to a MySpace page inside the district. Student reports say no, however, there is a reference to a proxy site. How will the district answer the authorities? Can they honestly say no, the student didn't gain access? No, they are in the dark.
It is my opinion that schools need to take a tiered approach to content filters. This approach would function almost the reverse of what many administrators think. Younger students should be filtered the heaviest. Not because of a high risk, but because they need help staying on track. For the K-3 audience, filtering could be deployed in an allowed sites only mode. In other words, the students can only get to predetermined sites. This is happening today and products like NetTrekker make this a great option.
As students get older, the filter should be gradually reduced. The students should be taught how to use the Internet respectfully and should be educated on the dangers that are there. Let's face it, they aren't filtered when they get home. By the time a student reaches high school, they should only be filtered from a select few categories such as Adult Content, Illegal Activity, Gambling and on some filters, Adware and Spyware. Use of proxies should be explained and a firm policy should be included in the acceptable use policy. Any activity in violation would be handled promptly. I feel that this approach would better educate students on the Internet, instill a sense of trust with them, and lead to a better educational experience.
Finally, in reference to staff use, districts really need to examine their policies. I can see filter in Adult Content and possibly Adware and Spyware. The rest should be open. District employees are professionals and should be treated as such. Right now, this group suffers the most in many high school environments. They don't know about proxies and are often blocked from many useful educational tools.
One area in relation to this topic that I feel strongly about is the proper use of content filters in a K-12 setting. I feel that I have a unique perspective on this topic as I was responsible for the management of the Content Filter at Colonial for the last six years. While content filters are required, the manner in which the filter is deployed are almost entirely up to the school district. The requirement states only that all users be monitored and that a filter is in place. Some districts will block almost everything in the hopes of having control. Districts subscribing to this method are in fantasy land. If you are looking for reality, you need to realize that this method only keeps you in the dark.
The majority of students in a high school environment know how to "get around" a filter. It usually involves using a proxy server that masks where you are going. To my knowledge, filters cannot stop this behavior, they can only stop access to a proxy site. That would be enough if new proxy servers didn't pop up online every day. In addition, users with just a bit of knowledge can make their home computer part of a proxy web if they know what they are doing.
So, how does this impact the district monitoring? Those responsible for monitoring activity will only see the proxy, they will not see that the student successfully got to MySpace. Let's explore this further. An incident happens and the school is contacted by the authorities. The authorities need to know if a student gained access to a MySpace page inside the district. Student reports say no, however, there is a reference to a proxy site. How will the district answer the authorities? Can they honestly say no, the student didn't gain access? No, they are in the dark.
It is my opinion that schools need to take a tiered approach to content filters. This approach would function almost the reverse of what many administrators think. Younger students should be filtered the heaviest. Not because of a high risk, but because they need help staying on track. For the K-3 audience, filtering could be deployed in an allowed sites only mode. In other words, the students can only get to predetermined sites. This is happening today and products like NetTrekker make this a great option.
As students get older, the filter should be gradually reduced. The students should be taught how to use the Internet respectfully and should be educated on the dangers that are there. Let's face it, they aren't filtered when they get home. By the time a student reaches high school, they should only be filtered from a select few categories such as Adult Content, Illegal Activity, Gambling and on some filters, Adware and Spyware. Use of proxies should be explained and a firm policy should be included in the acceptable use policy. Any activity in violation would be handled promptly. I feel that this approach would better educate students on the Internet, instill a sense of trust with them, and lead to a better educational experience.
Finally, in reference to staff use, districts really need to examine their policies. I can see filter in Adult Content and possibly Adware and Spyware. The rest should be open. District employees are professionals and should be treated as such. Right now, this group suffers the most in many high school environments. They don't know about proxies and are often blocked from many useful educational tools.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)