Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Virginia Becomes First State to Mandate Internet Safety Lessons

Posted by ScuttleMonkey on from the nanny-state dept.

kaufmanmoore writes "The Commonwealth of Virginia has become the first state in the nation to require that students in all grade levels receive a form of internet safety lessons. The story is scant on details about the lessons, but describes one recently at a high school where the presenter showed a social-networking profile of a convicted sex offender posing as a 15 year-old girl. "

17 of 262 comments (clear)

  1. This is great but... by gnick · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This is a fine idea - The internet is a treacherous place for children.

    But I'd rather see mandatory parenting.

    --
    He's getting rather old, but he's a good mouse.
    1. Re:This is great but... by joggle · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Even good parents may not be particularly Internet savvy. I think this is a great idea, especially if at least some of the lessons are given by other kids.

      I remember once helping out at a teacher conference in summer between 8th and 9th grades to help teach them (the teachers) how to use their new Macs (back around 1992).

    2. Re:This is great but... by gnick · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I'm not "Won't someone think of the children?" apologist. But, some parents are internet-illiterate. So, what's wrong with one extra source to say "Hey - There are dangers out there. Be careful." So be it. I'd much rather see parents educate themselves, but I think that calling this a MS/**AA FUD tactic is a stretch...

      --
      He's getting rather old, but he's a good mouse.
    3. Re:This is great but... by value_added · · Score: 5, Insightful

      This is a fine idea - The internet is a treacherous place for children.

      The web, in general, may be an inappropriate venue for a young child, but it's hardly treacherous. In fact, I'd say that the risk of being targeted and hunted down in some manner is probably far less than your local playground. Which is to say the risk is small enough to put aside, and hardly something that merits the exaggerated press coverage, let alone the subject of a government mandated safety policy.

      Besides, if a child of any age is inclined to participate in "chat rooms", then they'll have plenty of supervisory company from law enforcement officials and TV celebrities.

      What would real Internet Safety Program look like? I'd start with something that includes unhiding file extensions on Windows systems to prevent the .exe nonsense that unlike the bogeyman, is a real and demonstrable threat.

      But I'd rather see mandatory parenting.

      Agreed. But they're both working, and too busy or too tired, trying to make a living. Guess the responsibility falls on the rest of us, huh?

    4. Re:This is great but... by Actually,+I+do+RTFA · · Score: 4, Insightful

      A) Realize that no matter how much you warn them of the "dangers" of the Internet, kids will still get on it

      B) Realize that many teenagers will rebel and still get on

      These are the same. And abstince-only education doesn't work with sex either. The point is to teach them safe habits.

      C) Realize that by teaching ways that predators will stalk them, they will think they are safe if they don't have those

      Well, to a large degree, that's true. If you never give anyone enough information to track you down, and never meet people off the internet, then you are pretty safe. If they find out your IP address they might be able to find out your neighborhood/block. But you even avoid that by not directly connecting with people.

      That does discount spyware, but that seems like a second class of issues (or second class by the school.).

      D) And lastly, realize that this opens up an avenue for propaganda by MS and the *AA to try to squash innovation by spreading FUD with how "pirated" things always has viruses and can lead to identity theft and being stalked!!!One!11!![sic]

      Sure it seems like a good idea, but remember the government gave us the DMCA and most likely doesn't know anything about what the 'Net is really like.

      Wow, way to combine three typical slashdot dislikes. First, it was the federal government who gave us the DMCA, not Virginia. Second, a lot of the DMCA makes sense (the safe-harbor provisions). I suppose you are talking about the generality of the term 'encrption scheme' so that it applies to ROT-13 and the law against having mechanisms to get around it? Well, even that seems more carelessly written than evil.

      And even if there was a lot of anti-piracy in the class, that 1) seems valid, as pirated software is more likely to have spyware than the non-pirated alternative (exception that proves the rule, P2P clients). 2) Even if it was used to curb piracy, how does that lead to a lack of innovation? I would understand software patents, but... 3) Even if that was a negative consequence, teaching kids good online habits seems to outweigh it. 4) Piracy *is* illegal, and the government *should* support upholding the law.

      Political rant: I don't understand how the Republicans/Libertarians can win elections with attitudes like yours. Of course, if you think government will always fail, and you are in charge of it, it will. My coworker claims that all architecture meetings take forever and end indecisively, but of course he has the power to cause that outcome.

      --
      Your ad here. Ask me how!
    5. Re:This is great but... by WaltBusterkeys · · Score: 5, Insightful

      You're right that a lot of this overlaps with the "use common sense" lessons from other contexts. But the thing is that kids really don't all have a ton of common sense. In fact, a lot of kids demonstrate shockingly little of it at times. Maybe they have it and choose not to use it, or maybe it's just not fully developed.

      It's one thing to say "don't meet strange people handing out candy." It's a good lesson and one that schools should mention since a lot of parents don't remember to. Heck, when I was in elementary school (pre-Internet) they taught us that kind of basic safety lesson.

      But not all 3rd graders will extrapolate from "don't take candy from strangers" to "don't expose yourself on a webcam for a 'girl' in another state." I'm sure that any future-slashdotter would figure that one out without any help, but not all kids are above average.

      If this is really just adding lessons about Internet common-sense to lessons about real-world common-sense then it's probably on the net a good thing. Kids haven't developed their common sense yet and can easily get hurt by it.

    6. Re:This is great but... by davetd02 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      But is the school the best place for that? I agree that the school has all the kids under one roof, but parents need to step up too. It cuts both ways.

    7. Re:This is great but... by EvolutionsPeak · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Ever consider that the reason kids have no common sense is because they are spoon fed everything they should or shouldn't do? It seems like we do everything we can to prevent young people from actually using their brains to make a decision, and then we're upset that they can't think on their own and use common sense.

    8. Re:This is great but... by ceoyoyo · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Of course not. Common sense is the result of screwing up and managing to survive it. Kids haven't had a chance yet. Most adults today also haven't had the chance, which is why they also often demonstrate remarkably little common sense.

  2. kneejerk reaction by nomadic · · Score: 4, Insightful

    from the nanny-state dept.

    I know the usual kneejerk reaction here to any government act taken in regards to children is to immediately stick one's fingers in one's ears and shout NANNY STATE until one is hoarse, but I really don't see anything especially forbidding about teaching some basic internet safety skills in school.

    1. Re:kneejerk reaction by Delwin · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I see it as on par with mandatory traffic safety. ... both of which I'm all for.

  3. Abdication of responsibility by EmbeddedJanitor · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Some time ago school was a place you went to to learn reading, writing and arithmetic. Slowly schools are getting more loaded with stuff that should be taught by parents/community: sex ed, health studies, morals and ethics and now safe browsing.

    Soon schools will also have to teach kids to dress: "Now remember class, you can't wear a striped shirt with plaid pants".

    It does seem that school is getting to be less about education and more about daycare (so that parents can go and have careers instead of raising kids).

    --
    Engineering is the art of compromise.
  4. Re:A good idea that won't turn out well by cashman73 · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Having done most of my education in Virginia (6th grade through PhD), I think I have some idea how this is going to go. First, the teachers will receive a bare minimum amount of instruction and education into this. There will be some cookie-cutter materials that the department of education will pass out, and they'll make teachers sit through some class. But the bulk of the instruction will consist of the teacher plopping an over-produced, over-dramatic, under-budgeted, cheesy videocassette into an old VCR that the school should have replaced last century with something more modern. The teachers will then do nothing more than to facilitate some type of bogus group discussion on this whole internet thing. And, of course, the students won't take it seriously at all. Because how can some grown up know more about the facebooks and myspaces out there -- "grown ups aren't supposed to use these things." So half the students will end up practically sleeping through it, and the other half will end up cracking wise-ass jokes at the teacher and getting smart. So the overall effectiveness of this will be essentially nil.

    Oh wait, I forgot! The most important benefit of this program is actually for the state legislators who passed this, because it makes them look like they're "thinking of the children" and trying to "protect the precious little snowflakes", so that some numbnut can get re-elected and steal more money from the state's coffers. Yes folks, this is how politics works in Virginia. Surprised? You shouldn't be.

  5. Re:Fine but by cashman73 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    How about a course in basic economics for our own President! Forget the students! I just wish Bush knew this shiat,... ;-)

  6. wrong topic by globaljustin · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Teaching kids about the internet is a great idea. Unfortunately, being aware of adults seeking to trick them into sexual situations is NOT an internet issue, it is a social issue that has basic rules that should apply to all types of communication and interaction, no matter what the channel or method of communication might be (if you don't know what the basic rules are that I speak of, then you are probably a child molester). Health class is the area to address issues of adult/child abuse.

    The real issues that teens and pre-teens need to be taught about in regards to the internet are:

    1. If you post text, a picture, or video on the internet it will be there indefinitely, and everyone will potentially have access to it. This works for pics of all types, from sexually inappropriate things to pics from a party where people are drinking to social networking 'interests' lists. We've all heard stories of people getting turned down from a job b/c of a facebook profile. Young people need to know about this early.

    2. Cyber bullying. For crying out loud, this is huge, and young people are the most vulnerable. Kids need to know that what gets put online has real consequences, and conversely, to not take rumors or gossip posted online seriously. We've all seen the story about the girl who killed herself b/c a neighbor (parent posing as a teen!) was saying hateful things about her.

    3. What the internet is...a computer network. No more, no less. It's a powerful communications tool, just like a car is a powerful transportation tool. If you don't understand and respect what it can do, you or someone else will pay for it.

    I know I kinda sound lame and schoolmarm-ish on that last one, but it's true...damn I'm getting old.

    The Virginia school classes are nothing more than ignorant reactionary bs meant to calm the irrational fears of soccer moms who watch too much Dateline.

    --
    Thank you Dave Raggett
    1. Re:wrong topic by Belial6 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      "Unfortunately, being aware of adults seeking to trick them into sexual situations is NOT an internet issue, it is a social issue"

      This is absolutely correct. Not only that, it is WAY better to have your kid learn the basic rules of safety when there is a thousand miles of wire between them and the person that is trying to take advantage of them. (sexually or not) The idea that kids should learn how to deal with these people in face to face situations FIRST is just not logical.

      I agree with #1 and #2, but 'Cyber Bullying' is exactly the same situation as sexual predators. Bullying is not a different situation because it is on a computer. Schools want to pretend like it is because it allows them to extend their authority and thus power outside of the schools. In a hundred years, schools have not addressed real life bullying that includes the same things that happens online as well as physical assaults. Your example of the girl who killed herself, helps make this clear. The girl never did know that the person who first pretended to like her, and then said very mean things was an adult. The fact that it WAS an adult is totally irrelevant. The fact is that boys have pretended to like girls, only to spurn them later has been happening for as long as we have recorded history of male female interactions. It is safe to assume that it was going on well before we started recording history. The same can be said of girls pretending to like boys and then spurning them, as well as adults to adults. The girl killed herself because she was infatuated and got dumped. No one would have blamed the telephone for this if it happened over the phone, or the school if a boy had done this to her there.

      I would want to see the schools dealing with real live bullying before they start even considering dipping their greedy hands into my home. Heck

  7. Re:straw man by Belial6 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The idea that kids should learn how to deal with these people in face to face situations FIRST is just not logical. I never said that, or made any statements that insinuate it either. Your logical fallacy is called the straw man. I was not attributing that to you. I'm sorry if it sounded that way. You are correct that if I had attributed it to you, it would have been a strawman argument. The statement was concerning people who think that the internet is somehow more dangerous than real life.

    As for the bullying... The schools clearly have no interest in stopping bullying. It would be great if they did, but a hundred years of inaction shows that they don't. So, you have to ask why they want to do something about 'cyber' bullying when they have done nothing about assaults and abuse physically in front of them. The answer is clear. They want to take over being in charge of your kids when they are at home also. Assault and battery between peers does not make it something other than assault and battery. You and I are presumably peers, but if you punch me in the face, it is still assault and battery.

    The problem with having a health class that covers assaults is that the people committing them know full well what they are doing. No one is confused about it. They also know full well that the school doesn't give a crap if they do it as long as the teachers and administration don't have to deal with it. On the bullying, I think we may just have to only half agree.