When personal values and work activities collide
As I was going through a canned workshop created by a national media education group, I came across the following statements regarding what schools "should" be doing to deal with cyberbullying:
-Support a pro-social, healthy learning atmosphere;
-have a multi-faceted bullying prevention program that includes cyberbullying,
-integrate rules about cyberbullying into all existing policies and procedures. Internet appropriate use policies should include activities on devices off school property;
-establish confiedntial report....waitaminute....
Integrate rules about cyberbullying into all existing policies and procedures. Internet appropriate use policies should include activities on devices off school propert - are you freaking kidding me?
Since when is it a good idea to allow schools to dictate how technology that doesn't belong to them should be used by children who are not on school property even outside of school hours? Since when should the authority of the school supercede the authority and responsibility of the parent to determine what, how, and when their child gets to use technology?
In no way am I claiming that cyberbullying is not a serious problem. As someone who was constantly bullied throughout her school life, I can attest to the wretched and ongoing aftereffects of psychological/social bullying. I shudder to think how much worse it could have been if my bullies had access to the internet and the capabilities of doing the sort of crap that so many kids pull now. But does that mean that the locus of control should be handed over to what would essentially be a government-sanctioned watchdog? Hell no. Responsibility for monitoring the use of technology and doling out appropriate discipline away from school is the responsibility of the parents. Not all parents will take responsibility, but that does not mean that it should be handed over to the school system.
There already exists laws that require and allow the reporting of child abuse and neglect, so that cannot become the excuse to instigate property use policies that apply off school premises. Harassment, assult, slander, libel, and the making of threats is already illegal and can be reported, so that cannot become the excuse either. Furthermore, regardless of where cyberbullies set up their nasty websites, networks, or conduct other activities that target their victim, the effects will bleed into the school. The victim will still be bullied at school, and the sites or activities can be accessed via school computers - which gives the school the right (and the responsibility) to act on the bullying in a manner that fully encompasses their realm of authority. The bullying will not stop once the kids involved leave home and head to school, nor will it be restricted to non-school hours, which means it can be dealt with on school property and during school hours. Why am I so certain of this? Because kids have no self-control when it comes to bullying, and it never, ever stops regardless of the time or the location. Bullies will target their victim wherever and whenever they have access to the victim. If a school wants to deal with cyberbullying, they will have ample opportunity to do so in a manner that does not infringe on the personal property or privacy of their students or the students' families.
As is completely obvious, I am infuriated over the suggestions that are made in that workshop. It pushes a big-brother style agenda that I find horrifying. The lines of responsibility and guardianship become blurred, and clashes over the fundamental values of parents and schools will inevitably occur. What's more, allowing schools to create policies that apply to devices that do not belong to them and are used off their property constitutes a flagrant invasion of privacy that could quickly escalate into something really, really ugly.
And if you think I am being alarmist in my opinion, I invite you to read the following news articles:
Pa. School Faces FBI Probe, Lawsuit, for Using Webcams on Laptops to Watch Students at Home
I also suggest you read the school's official response:
LMSD initial response to invasion of privacy allegation
In the official response to their Orwellian monitoring tactics, Dr. McGinley (school superintendent) states that "This [tracking and monitoring] feature has only been used for the limited purpose of locating a lost, stolen or missing laptop. The District has not used the tracking feature or web cam for any other purpose or in any other manner whatsoever." That statement is directly contradicted by the actions of that school's staff, who accused one of the student laptop users of drug dealing when they captured web cam footage of him with what his parents later clarified was candy.
Yes, fellow Canadians, that happened in the US. Rest assured there are plenty of people here who would agree with institutions and governments developing policies that would allow for such flagrant violation of privacy. The sort of people who who think that this media education organizations suggestion that schools should have internet use policies that "include activities on devices off school property" are those who believe that libraries should put parental filters on their public-access computers (thus imposing severe restriction to information access even for utterly benign and banal topics) and that librarians should monitor underage users for activities the parents would consider inappropriate. These are people who feel that government or government-sanctioned organizations should be allowed to pry into personal affairs for no good reason because they feel people should have 'nothing to hide'. These are people who would willingly give over personal responsibility and accountability on the brutally mistaken notion that it will make their world a better, safer place.
Such tactics can spiral quickly out of control, and have done so in the past. While off-premises internet use policies and remotely controlled webcams on laptops may seem a pale comparison to neighbours in East Germany spying on one another during the country's communist era, the core value behind those actions is frighteningly similar.
-Support a pro-social, healthy learning atmosphere;
-have a multi-faceted bullying prevention program that includes cyberbullying,
-integrate rules about cyberbullying into all existing policies and procedures. Internet appropriate use policies should include activities on devices off school property;
-establish confiedntial report....waitaminute....
Integrate rules about cyberbullying into all existing policies and procedures. Internet appropriate use policies should include activities on devices off school propert - are you freaking kidding me?
Since when is it a good idea to allow schools to dictate how technology that doesn't belong to them should be used by children who are not on school property even outside of school hours? Since when should the authority of the school supercede the authority and responsibility of the parent to determine what, how, and when their child gets to use technology?
In no way am I claiming that cyberbullying is not a serious problem. As someone who was constantly bullied throughout her school life, I can attest to the wretched and ongoing aftereffects of psychological/social bullying. I shudder to think how much worse it could have been if my bullies had access to the internet and the capabilities of doing the sort of crap that so many kids pull now. But does that mean that the locus of control should be handed over to what would essentially be a government-sanctioned watchdog? Hell no. Responsibility for monitoring the use of technology and doling out appropriate discipline away from school is the responsibility of the parents. Not all parents will take responsibility, but that does not mean that it should be handed over to the school system.
There already exists laws that require and allow the reporting of child abuse and neglect, so that cannot become the excuse to instigate property use policies that apply off school premises. Harassment, assult, slander, libel, and the making of threats is already illegal and can be reported, so that cannot become the excuse either. Furthermore, regardless of where cyberbullies set up their nasty websites, networks, or conduct other activities that target their victim, the effects will bleed into the school. The victim will still be bullied at school, and the sites or activities can be accessed via school computers - which gives the school the right (and the responsibility) to act on the bullying in a manner that fully encompasses their realm of authority. The bullying will not stop once the kids involved leave home and head to school, nor will it be restricted to non-school hours, which means it can be dealt with on school property and during school hours. Why am I so certain of this? Because kids have no self-control when it comes to bullying, and it never, ever stops regardless of the time or the location. Bullies will target their victim wherever and whenever they have access to the victim. If a school wants to deal with cyberbullying, they will have ample opportunity to do so in a manner that does not infringe on the personal property or privacy of their students or the students' families.
As is completely obvious, I am infuriated over the suggestions that are made in that workshop. It pushes a big-brother style agenda that I find horrifying. The lines of responsibility and guardianship become blurred, and clashes over the fundamental values of parents and schools will inevitably occur. What's more, allowing schools to create policies that apply to devices that do not belong to them and are used off their property constitutes a flagrant invasion of privacy that could quickly escalate into something really, really ugly.
And if you think I am being alarmist in my opinion, I invite you to read the following news articles:
Pa. School Faces FBI Probe, Lawsuit, for Using Webcams on Laptops to Watch Students at Home
I also suggest you read the school's official response:
LMSD initial response to invasion of privacy allegation
In the official response to their Orwellian monitoring tactics, Dr. McGinley (school superintendent) states that "This [tracking and monitoring] feature has only been used for the limited purpose of locating a lost, stolen or missing laptop. The District has not used the tracking feature or web cam for any other purpose or in any other manner whatsoever." That statement is directly contradicted by the actions of that school's staff, who accused one of the student laptop users of drug dealing when they captured web cam footage of him with what his parents later clarified was candy.
Yes, fellow Canadians, that happened in the US. Rest assured there are plenty of people here who would agree with institutions and governments developing policies that would allow for such flagrant violation of privacy. The sort of people who who think that this media education organizations suggestion that schools should have internet use policies that "include activities on devices off school property" are those who believe that libraries should put parental filters on their public-access computers (thus imposing severe restriction to information access even for utterly benign and banal topics) and that librarians should monitor underage users for activities the parents would consider inappropriate. These are people who feel that government or government-sanctioned organizations should be allowed to pry into personal affairs for no good reason because they feel people should have 'nothing to hide'. These are people who would willingly give over personal responsibility and accountability on the brutally mistaken notion that it will make their world a better, safer place.
Such tactics can spiral quickly out of control, and have done so in the past. While off-premises internet use policies and remotely controlled webcams on laptops may seem a pale comparison to neighbours in East Germany spying on one another during the country's communist era, the core value behind those actions is frighteningly similar.