Slashdot Mirror


Fixing Internet Censorship In Schools

jcatcw writes "Schools and libraries are hurting students by setting up heavy-handed Web filtering. The problem goes back for years. A filter blocked the Web site of former House Majority Leader Richard Armey because it detected the word 'dick,' according to a 2001 study from the Brennan Center of Justice. The purpose of schools should be to teach students to live in a democratic society, and that means teaching critical thinking and showing students controversial Web sites, says Craig Cunningham, a professor at National-Louis University. He quoted from a National Research Council study: 'Swimming pools can be dangerous for children. To protect them, one can install locks ... [or] teach them to swim.' Web filtering also leads to inequities in education based on household income. Students from more affluent areas have access to the Internet at home and, often, more enlightened parents who can let them access information blocked in schools and libraries. Poorer students without home access don't have those opportunities."

35 of 207 comments (clear)

  1. Think of the... by Yvan256 · · Score: 3, Funny

    Swimming pools can be dangerous for children. To protect them, one can install locks ... [or] teach them to swim.'

    Won't somebody think of the lock makers!

    1. Re:Think of the... by bugs2squash · · Score: 2, Funny

      It may work for a few, but being locked into a swimming pool is a harsh way to teach kids to swim.

      --
      Nullius in verba
  2. Re:but by Hardolaf · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I'm one of those children and the web filters are annoying when trying to research topics such as caffeine addiction.

  3. Re:but by AliasMarlowe · · Score: 2, Funny

    I've been a child for several decades, but for some reason, all those filters let me through!

    --
    Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. - Voltaire
  4. bad analogy? by Simulant · · Score: 2, Insightful

    'Swimming pools can be dangerous for children. To protect them, one can install locks ... [or] teach them to swim.'

    I'm tired & slow today... someone please explain this analogy with respect to internet porn (which is the context from which the quote was taken). The possibilities seem endless.

    1. Re:bad analogy? by AlexBirch · · Score: 3, Funny

      'Swimming pools can be dangerous for children. To protect them, one can install locks ... [or] teach them to swim.'

      I'm tired & slow today... someone please explain this analogy with respect to internet porn (which is the context from which the quote was taken). The possibilities seem endless.

      The analogy is good, because once you learn how to swim, you can never drown.

    2. Re:bad analogy? by Locke2005 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Different analogy: In the US, kids today are not allowed to even taste alcohol until they move out of their parents homes and into college dorms, upon which time most immediately start engaging in binge drinking because they have never learned what their limits are with respect to alcohol. Societies wherein children regularly imbibe wine with their parents during meals have far fewer problems with alcoholism. Want to really education your child? Take him/her out and get them totally puking drunk just once, then videotape them (and don't go easy on them). Show them the video as soon as they sober up. They'll learn how stupid they look after drinking, and they'll probably never touch whatever they got puking drunk on again (our instincts are to stay away from anything that makes us throw up).

      With regards to the internet, they will inevitably see inappropriate content at some point; they need to learn how to deal with it without making a big deal out of it. While I could happily have lived my life without ever having seen Goatse guy or tubgirl, at some point students will be turned loose onto the internet with only their self-discipline for control. Better they learn how to control themselves then try to keep them locked in a tower; eventually, they are going to get out.

      --
      I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
  5. The purpose is not to protect children... by John+Hasler · · Score: 3, Insightful

    ...it is to protect teachers and adminstrators against religious zealots.

    --
    Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
    1. Re:The purpose is not to protect children... by thatblackguy · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The only way to truly do that is to become as crazy as the zealots. Anything short of that and you will still find objections.

      Fuck them, drag them into 2010. Or at least (in the case of America) remind them that they can't simultaneously chant LAND OF THE FREE and omg, censor that.

    2. Re:The purpose is not to protect children... by twidarkling · · Score: 2, Funny

      Zug Zug!

      --
      Canada: The US's more awesome sibling.
  6. It's completely pointless. by areusche · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Many kids I know nowadays have a phone with web access enabled. Why bother trying to block facebook when they can just simply browse over their cell phones?

    Heck when I was in high school I had a teacher use a wireless air card to get onto youtube since the district tech staff were blocking so many websites for no reason whatsoever.

    1. Re:It's completely pointless. by stephanruby · · Score: 2, Informative

      Many schools do ban cell phones, or require that they at least be turned off while the kids are on school premises.

  7. My local swimming pool... by Angostura · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Doesn't let children under 8 enter the pool without an adult accompanying them. and staying close by. Seems a fair enough analogy.

  8. an excellent argument... by gandhi_2 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    ...from someone who doesn't work for a school district, nor will be crucified by the politicians, school board (who are politicians), parents, and news media when little johnny pulls up something "objectionable".

    actually people loose their actual careers over this kinda stuff.... you have to at least *try* to filter.

    1. Re:an excellent argument... by SuperQ · · Score: 3, Interesting

      No, you don't. I helped run the network for a school a while back. We didn't filter anything. We logged everything using a proxy. We simply made it very well known to the students that anything they surfed would be logged. We never had any issues. This was even the school for "bad kids"

      We had a couple of the "bad hackers" from the highschool. We made them (with supervision) in charge of keeping the linux machines in the computer lab running.

  9. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  10. Webfilters, a great motivator! by synthesizerpatel · · Score: 3, Insightful

    If you really want a kid to learn how computers work, put a filter between them in the internet. They'll figure out a way to circumvent it if they're smart. And if they're too stupid to break out, think of it as a your-kid filter for the internet and not an internet filter for your kid.

    Everybody wins!

  11. Critical thinking by Dracos · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Children aren't taught critical thinking because they might grow up to be... critical thinkers.

    Unthinking, uncritical people are easier to control and/or coerce to your will.

  12. No answer will be perfect by rotide · · Score: 5, Insightful

    No single solution will be perfect in a "for the children" argument.

    Here is what I would do/suggest.

    1) Make a sensible AUP for school computers. No Porn, etc.

    2) Have sensible punishments for breaking the AUP. (No cops, no expulsions. Detention sure, suspension/parental notification, if you have to.)

    3) Leave the net _wide open_ for each student.

    4) Log all activity so that in the event it is suspected a student broke the AUP you can verify the infringement took place and apply a sensible punishment.

    5) Break the AUP too many times and you can only use school computers under strict filters, or under direct supervision (read: someone watching over your shoulder) in addition to normal punishment.

    Don't coddle. Don't expell. Don't freak out. Just teach the kids what is and isn't acceptable and let them learn how to deal with rules and sensible punishments.

    Yes, this means kids might get exposed to hardcore porn from time to time. Big f'in deal. For me the net wasn't around and I saw good ol' VHS tapes. It happens whether you threaten death as a punishment or cookies as a reward. It will still happen.

    But in my opinion. School is there to learn, not stifle. Teach and use the full brunt of the tools we have to do it.

    Sadly, probably won't happen because little miss perfect's perfect mother will sue the school because her daughter heard that another student might have seen a naked picture on a school computer.

  13. CIPA Compliance by ohchaos · · Score: 5, Informative

    In order to receive Federal E-Rate discounts, public schools are required to have filtering mechanisms in place that meet the standards set by the Children's Internet Protection Act.

    I've administered K12 networks with internet access for over 15 years (both pre-CIPA, and post CIPA)... I personally preferred not having to filter and teaching personal responsibility, especially with high school students. Usually a couple times a semester a student would make a bad choice, and would be made an example of.... which would usually keep the rest of the students on the straight and narrow.

    But for now, CIPA is the law of the land, so if you want free choice and thinking on your school's internet connection, contact your senator and congressman, because local admins really have no choice in this matter.

    1. Re:CIPA Compliance by AldoRaine · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I was just about to post this. CIPA requires that schools operate "a technology protection measure with respect to any of its computers with Internet access that protects against access through such computers to visual depictions that are obscene, child pornography, or harmful to minors."

      E-Rate offers school districts enormous discounts on certain products and services, so CIPA makes it cost ineffective to offer unrestricted Internet access to students.

    2. Re:CIPA Compliance by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 2, Insightful

      "I personally preferred not having to filter and teaching personal responsibility"

      I prefer this method as well, but I also know that there is no such thing as "personal responsibility" any longer. Blame Parents, Blame Teachers, Blame the Superintendent Office, Blame Liberals, Blame Right Wing Religious Nuts.

      Sue!

      Doing nothing has its problems as does doing something. And I'm not sure which is actually worse (given the status quo).

      As long as there is a lawyer around, and money to be had, and someone to take offense at something, there is going to be problems. And, if you've been in Educational Technology, you'll know I am completely accurate.

      One of the things CIPA does, is require certain baseline filtering, which lawyers cannot sue the district over. It is set by law, protecting the districts from random lawsuits by people who want to promote their own agenda.

      --
      Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
  14. Re:I disagree with your premise by Marc+Desrochers · · Score: 2, Interesting

    ... satisfy the Amish.

  15. Facts? by blueg3 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I like how a blog post that simply states, without evidence, that web filters lead to income-based educational inequalities is simply asserted in TFS as a fact. Also how TFS chooses to copy text directly from said blog post without using quotation marks.

  16. So what? by Gothmolly · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Kids in poorer homes probably miss out on a lot of opportunities. Are you going to legislate that away too ?

    --
    I want to delete my account but Slashdot doesn't allow it.
  17. Re:So much slips past the filters... by slimjim8094 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Do a search for "yiff" or "yiffing" on a filtered computer or search engine.

    No. No thank you. I'd rather not.

    --
    I have developed a truly marvelous proof of this comment, which this signature is too narrow to contain.
  18. We live in a world that promotes the Nanny state by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The purpose of schools should be to teach students to live in a democratic society, and that means teaching critical thinking and showing students controversial Web sites, says Craig Cunningham, a professor at National-Louis University.

    http://www.foxnews.com/world/2010/03/25/teachers-leave-boy-stranded-tree-school-policy/

    That is a story about a 5 year old being stranded in a tree. The teachers "watched from afar" because of a school policy. A passerby stopped to help, and now faces possible legal action. That example happens to from the UK, but there is plenty of the same sort of thing going on in the US. We are being conditioned to not to do anything without the approval and assistance of the government.

    The Nanny state would not like it if people could think critically all on their own without the government there to make sure they don't hurt themselves.

  19. Re:So much slips past the filters... by Sponge+Bath · · Score: 2, Informative

    Do a search for "yiff"...

    Geoffrey Chaucer:
    ...That yiff that god that hevene and erthe made
    Wolde haue a love For beaute and goodness
    And womanhede and trouthe and semelynesse ...

  20. Re:Right... by Pojut · · Score: 3, Insightful

    In the sense that it affects what students have the ability to research, I don't think it's a stretch.

  21. Re:We live in a world that promotes the Nanny stat by Mr.+Slippery · · Score: 2, Informative

    http://www.foxnews.com/world/2010/03/25/teachers-leave-boy-stranded-tree-school-policy/

    That is a story about a 5 year old being stranded in a tree. The teachers "watched from afar" because of a school policy. A passerby stopped to help, and now faces possible legal action.

    An inaccurate story, as it turns out. It didn't happen that way at all.

    As usual, Fox is a source of negative information.

    Anyway, isn't it kind of odd to claim that the neglect of a child (which, I repeat, did not actually occur) means the promotion of the "Nanny state"? Aren't nannies supposed to be protecting children, not neglecting them? But I guess that would require some thought about just what a "Nanny state" means, and it's clearly not a phrase meant to provoke thought; it's just a right-wing shibboleth.

    --
    Tom Swiss | the infamous tms | my blog
    You cannot wash away blood with blood
  22. Re:I disagree with your premise by BobMcD · · Score: 2, Informative

    ... satisfy the Amish.

    I think the present filters satisfy every Amish parent with children in public school already. In that there are probably zero, and if there were any they would likely not use a computer with that being against their religion?

  23. Re:but by jim_v2000 · · Score: 2, Informative

    It's an ok place to start look for sources. A better place is a journal/periodical database. Most of the time you can get free access via your school, university, or a public library. Google Scholar is also a good research resource.

    --
    Don't take life so seriously. No one makes it out alive.
  24. Obligatory by dangitman · · Score: 3, Funny

    Dick Armey? Who's his wife, Vagina Coastguard?

    --
    ... and then they built the supercollider.
  25. The pool analogy is flawed by jonwil · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Even if you DO teach the kids to swim, that doesn't necessarily mean its safe to allow young kids to swim without supervision.