Mischief and Mayhem revisited

"We don't let people drive until they're 16. They can't vote until they're 18, and they can't drink until they're 21. Yet kids in the third grade are on the Internet." Dan Janke, teacher.

I've been writing about the ethical use of the Internet for the better part of 10 years. I just checked. Why?

This morning's Minneapolis Star Tribune newspaper included the story Internet Give Power to Vengeful Students which was a recap of incidents occurring in a local town and summary a variety of similar cases across the country. A teacher, Dan Janke,  was suspected of sending sexually explicit e-mails to 6th grade girls. It was quickly discovered that his email address had been "spoofed" by a couple of 7th grade boys, but not until after he had been suspended.

As similar incident happened in our district about 10 years ago (yes, Mankto IS  always on technology's cutting edge), and I wrote a column about it: Mischief and Mayhem . On re-reading my thoughts at the time, I didn't take the topic seriously enough. What I at the time called "mischief," may indeed be causing more harm than I had then ever imagined.

Mr.Janke's quote which opens this blog entry caught my attention, asking me to consider again, "What is the right age for students to be given Internet access? be given e-mail accounts? be allowed unsupervised access to IM, MySpace, chatrooms, etc.? In our righteous efforts to help of students become "technologically literate." are we, teacher and parents both, pushing them into cyberspace without sufficient guidance?

One thing that has always bothered me is that our district's Internet Acceptable Use Policy is written at probably at least an eighth grade reading level. Yet our district, like most, routinely has even primary school children using Internet resources - presumably following guidelines they cannot yet read. Where are the studies that look at student's online activities and ask at what stage of moral development do students need to be operating in order to be both safe and ethical?

A number of years ago, I did a program evaluation for a suburban Milwaukee school district. At the time, the board had banned computers from all classrooms below fourth grade. I was appalled. Today, I am thinking the district was wise.  The Alliance for Childhood has long advocated delaying using technology with kids, giving children a chance to play, to interact with real objects in physical environment, and read and be read to from real books.

What would be really be lost by removing all K-3 student computers in our schools?  Eliminating all elementary student computers? Besides sales to computer and software companies, of course?

And be careful my constructivist friends - kids were engaged in such learning long before computers.

Comments

[Dean Shareski]

My response to removing computers until 4th grade would be, "What does that accomplish?" I don't think it relates to the main issue of your post. If the concern is that younger students don't need computers/internet because of a lack of interaction with the physical environment that is one issue. But it doesn't solve the issue of ethical use. I would make the arugument that a diverse educational experience would have a balanced use of technology and real world experiences irrespective of age.

On the specific issue of unethical use, it seems to fit into the lingering discussion around myspace and filtering. I continue to ask educators, parents and students to have conversations rather than create policies to try and control an uncontrollable, real world.

[Brian Crosby]

I would tend to agree with Dean for the most part. I don't think we necessarily need to push tech in lower elementary, but if a teacher wants to use it to leverage a lesson I think it should be there as an option just like any manipulative - and it's a great time to start the conversation about appropriate use.
One issue to think about is that maybe 15% of students at my school have internet access at home and those that do tend to have parents that work nights and don't have the tech savvy to realize that this is a topic for family conversation. School might be the only place that kind of training might happen for most of my students - maybe this doesn't lend itself to a blanket policy.

[Mark Ahlness]

You say, "In our righteous efforts to help of students become "technologically literate." are we, teacher and parents both, pushing them into cyberspace without sufficient guidance?"

Doug, they are going into cyberspace anyway. If we do not teach them how to use the stuff safely and responsibly, we are being negligent. It is truly the OBLIGATION of any educator who cares about his/her students' future to teach with the tools of today - or are you advocating the mandating of a "pencils only" toolkit for the 21st century?

I say use the new tools at the earliest age possible.

I am absolutely dumbfounded that this reactionary train of thought is even considered. Good grief.

[Sara Kelly Johns]

You're being provocative again, methinks.

Don't take computers away at the lower level, teach the students to use them well and appropriately for the age level. You can prevent disasterous and sad consequences if students are taught what NOT to do as well as how to be appropriate online. It's way too dangerous to ignore computers in their lives. We teach them to stop, drop and roll and to not talk to strangers in our schools as well as in our homes.

And then there's the use of appropriate resources for research, used effectively, that should be encouraged and taught at that level, too.

Ban 'em? No, teach 'em. Kids need parents to be parents and need schools to teach them.

[Sara Kelly Johns]

But..the balance IS important between all those activities you list that are so very important and use of computers. I'd hate to see a computer-centered classroom at that age, but it's a tool they should have in appropriate doses. See, I DO agree with you sometimes...somewhat :-).

[Jeff Utecht]

Oh Doug,

I teach Kindergarten and 1st grade computers. Though we have not gone on the Internet this year they do know it exists.

It is national TV Turn Off week which means we are focusing on screen free activities. So I asked my Kindergarteners today what kind of things are they not going to use. The list, of which I know I'm missing a few, is as follows:
PS2
XBox
Computer
GameBoy
PS
Cell phone (it does have a screen!)

So as the other commenters stated: Sure we can take computers out of the classroom, but that doesn't mean students aren't going to be exposed to them, and by the time they get to 4th grade I'm afraid we will be undoing bad habits already formed. With Xbox and PS2 they can play networked games...they are already networking in social forums. I think pretending technology doesn't exist for these little guys is turning a blind eye to the problem. Not only does it exist, but they are already using it. Does it need to be the center of their universe, no, but is it a tool that can be used that students already have experience with? Yes.