 |
| image source: Jack Zalium (Flickr) |
Permitting a student to roam the internet freely is
like setting them loose on the Las Vegas Strip at night with a credit card, a
map, a camera, a megaphone, and a mask of anonymity. It could be a recipe for disaster, and
provoke legal issues that a school would not want to be a part of. In addition, this lack of guidelines and
boundaries could place the child in danger. For these reasons, it is critical that an
educational institution instructs students how to use technology properly, supervises
their use of networked equipment, and establishes and publishes an Acceptable
Use Policy.
An AUP is a policy that a user must agree to follow in
order to be provided with access to a network or technology peripherals. It serves to remind students that technology exists
for an educational purpose, that they are expected to use it respectfully and
responsibly (as ambassadors of the school), that they are being monitored, and
that consequences exist for infractions. It is important the students
understand that an IT teacher is available to address and concerns, questions,
or issues that arise pertaining to the policies set forth. If written well, an
AUP could be used as a teaching tool. Creating a practical and effective AUP
requires research and planning, customization, and school stakeholders’
involvement.
The National Education Association suggests that an
effective AUP include six key elements: a preamble, definition section, policy
statement, acceptable uses section, unacceptable uses section, and a
violations/sanctions section (Education World). Typically
both students and parents sign the document acknowledging restrictions to the network
access and releasing the school of responsibility for infractions.
The preamble is
an introduction to the purpose and goals of the policy. The definition section defines key words
used throughout the document for parent and student comprehension. In my
opinion the AUP document should be written in such a way that the definitions
of ambiguous words are included in line with any reference to them. Placing
them in bulk at the beginning takes away from the flow and central message of
the policy. The policy statement
lists the services covered by the AUP as well as the means by which students
can come to use those services at school. I believe that this section should be
brief and general in scope, as it would be inefficient and perhaps impossible
to list all technology services offered at the school. The acceptable and unacceptable
uses sections are meant to list appropriate and inappropriate behaviors
surrounding the use of the machines.
Again, it is advisable to keep these general or at least categorized so
as not to overwhelm and discourage the reader.
The violations/sanctions
section serves to tell students how to report violations of the policy and
what the consequences would be for students’ violations of the agreement. I would suggest adding a conclusion to the
document that lists some ways in which the school tries to keep students safe (providing
supervised work periods, search filters and firewalls, virus protection,
prevention of downloads of executable programs, etc.) It should also be clear about the limitations
of liability (e.g. the school will not be responsible for damage or harm to
persons, files, data, or hardware), as there needs to be a clear separation between
students’ behavior on the network and any unnecessary and unfair legal or
financial ramifications.
In my research of AUPs,
this recommended structure was difficult to find in practice. One exemplar crowdsourced school
social media policy
from edudemic.com does not include all of those elements, but is very effective
in its language and structure. This document starts off by recognizing and offering
examples of how social networking is fun and valuable, but alludes to risks and
uncertainties that may spoil its use while in school. The specific guidelines that follow are
grouped under various umbrellas of civic duty and character, similar to
rules/expectations you might see in any classroom (e.g. responsibility, respect,
etc.). The language of the guidelines is
direct but descriptive. It is not
condescending or threatening, nor is it sugar-coated. The matter-of-fact details give any student
clarity as to proper behaviors on the internet, even going to far as to suggest
options for if and when he/she makes a mistake.
It encourages everyone to be part of protecting and representing the
school without force or fear.
Netiquette, plagiarism, personal safety, and
cyberbullying are all worth mentioning in an Acceptable Use Policy because they
directly correspond to many of the harmful or prohibited actions mentioned
within the policy. They give a name and
purpose to the behaviors that the AUP is aiming to curtail. The concrete examples of acceptable and
unacceptable use listed at the end of the model AUP also correlate to those
four domains and reinforce what proper technology use actually looks like. This keeps the tone of the document
supportive, positive, and constructive.
It is impossible for an AUP to cover all technologies that
exist or will exist, which is something that the other example social media acceptable use policy
from edudemic.com does a good job of
incorporating in its “bylaws”.
Therefore, the rules put forth should be broad enough to include social
media, email, hardware, school network storage, and even personally-owned
devices. Obviously some popular or standard
technologies will have specific guidelines that need mentioning (such as
sharing passwords to access the network, exchanging files through email, or downloading
programs). However, for the most part, expectations
for all device and social media use are interconnected. In a Techlearning.com article,
principal Eric Sheninger points out that in his school’s documentation there
are no long, drawn out policies for BYOT, cell phone use, or social media.
There is one short document for parents and students to sign that shows their
acceptance of responsibility for using all devices properly in all learning
environments.
The AUP should act like a guide for behavior, and not
a legally binding, convoluted list of fine print. To that regard, it should use language that
all constituents can understand. The language should stem from a perspective of
trust and common sense. The Gwinnett
County Acceptable Use of Electronic Media for Students is an example of an
AUP that is quite direct and forceful in tone, but loses its audience due to
its threatening use of ALL CAPS and reminders of potential state and federal
violations. It would be difficult to use
as a learning tool within any elementary classroom context. In fact, it would
fill any fourth grader with fear! On the other hand, the AUP from Pittsylvania
County Schools includes a verbose and adult version labeled “School Board
Policy” as well as breakdown of graphically-enhanced and publically accessible AUP
“highlights” for elementary (as well as middle/high school) students. This compromise obviously kept all
stakeholders within their comfort zone of “coverage” and ensured students had a
grasp of the guidelines buried in the legalese of the official document.
In the same Techlearning.com article
discussed previously, we learn the importance of including parents, students,
teachers, and school leaders in the discussion to create such policies. There really is no need to bring in policymakers and lawyers
when an AUP is meant to represent the voice of the users. Each school should be allowed flexibility and
customization of language and content according to the students in attendance. For
example, in the North
Arlington Elementary Schools’ AUP, there is a special section devoted to
technology programs of special importance to the school. Teleconferencing and
Study Island (an internet program) each feature an explanation and an opt-in/opt-out
permission section to ensure understanding and comfort with the programs.
Another example of personalization can be found in the Montgomery
School Responsible Use policy which puts forth different expectations for each sub-set of grade levels
according to media and technology likely to be used. Each document (PreK-2, 3-5, 6-8) is written
in developmentally appropriate language and assumes a certain maturity level of
the target audience. This makes the
document something that any child can feel comfortable reading, discussing, and
obeying. What makes this particular
document effective is that it begins with a very positive preface that “Montgomery
School believes that all students should have access to technology when they
act in a responsible, efficient, courteous and legal manner. Internet access
and other technologies available to students and teachers, offer a multitude of
global resources. Our goal in providing these services is to enhance the
educational development of our students.” Instead of beginning with negative
vocabulary about prohibited behaviors or consequences, the introduction is
assuming the best from its students. The
rest of the agreement is comprised of a series “I promise” statements that help
the document read more like a friendly contract.
The Acceptable Use Policies for schools located where I
currently work in Bermuda are not part of the public domain. In fact, to find the policy for my current
school I had to dig through both the student and staff handbook. Sure enough, a list of privileges,
restrictions, and consequences “covered the school’s back” and sought to keep
students out of trouble, but they are not adequately discussed at school or
posted as a reminder in networked areas.
The AUP, as it exists, is simply stuck in paper form in a thick booklet
between “uniform code” and the school calendar, blurred from excessive
photocopying. Perhaps it’s time for a
revamp. At the very least, it’s time for
a refresher with the students…before they head back on the internet “Las Vegas-style”!
 |
| image source: en.wikipedia.org |
Education World. (n.d.). Getting Started on the
Internet: Developing an Acceptable Use
Policy (AUP). Retrieved from: http://www.educationworld.com/a_curr/curr093.shtml
Gwinnett County. (n.d.) Acceptable
Use of Electronic Media for Students (Version 050107). Retrieved from: http://www.gwinnett.k12.ga.us/BerkeleyLakeES/PDF/AUP_web.PDF.
Montgomery School. (n.d.). Responsible Use Policy. Retrieved from: http://www.montgomeryschool.org/program/lower-school/ls-curriculum/technologylibrary/responsible-use-policy/index.aspx
Nielsen, L. (2012). Looking to create a social media or BYOD policy? Look no further.
Retrieved from: http://www.techlearning.com/Default.aspx?tabid=67&EntryId=4355
North Arlington Elementary Schools. (2008). Computer/Internet Acceptable Use Policy.
Retrieved from: http://www.narlington.k12.nj.us/Files/AUP/Elem_AUP_08-09--compact.pdf.
Pittsylvania County Schools. (n.d.) Computer Technology Acceptable Use Policy.
Retrieved from: http://www.pcs.k12.va.us/aup/index.html
No comments:
Post a Comment