BFTP: Controlling online student postings

A weekend Blue Skunk "feature" will be a revision of an old post. I'm calling this BFTP: Blast from the Past. Original post, March 12, 2007.  This topic was back in the news this week.  Even this Supreme Court allows students First Amendment rights.

One of our most thoughtful library/tech leaders here in Minnesota posted this question to a state listserv (used here with permission):

A teacher in the _______ Project has been targeted on a Facebook site. The offending student deleted the page, using his cell phone, while a school administrator was speaking to the class. The teacher is quite upset and contacted me for information in how to proceed. I am aware of 1st Amendment issues, etc. and of the controversy surrounding what schools can and cannot control, but am wondering what policies folks have in place and how these situations are being resolved. Thanks in advance for your thoughts.

Do we need additional policies for the read/write web?

I've just been doing a little digging into our standing AUP to see if it covers most Web 2.0-related issues, and my conclusion is that we do not need additional policies to cover these newer applications and resources. Our policy already states (bold is mine):

• Users will not use the school district system to transmit or receive obscene, abusive, profane, lewd, vulgar, rude, inflammatory, threatening, disrespectful, or sexually explicit language.
• Users will not use the school district system to access, review, upload, download, store, print, post, or distribute materials that use language or images that are inappropriate to the educational setting or disruptive to the educational process and will not post information or materials that could cause damage or danger of disruption.
• Users will not use the school district system to access, review, upload, download, store, print, post, or distribute materials that use language or images that advocate violence or discrimination toward other people (hate literature) or that may constitute harassment or discrimination.

But this does NOT cover student off-site behaviors. I do remember from Dangerously Irrelevant Scott McLeod's session at the November 2006 TIES tech conference that schools have lost most cases when they have tried to discipline students for off-site speech issues, no matter how egregious. (And according to the linked article above, this is still the case.)

There is also a Point/Counterpoint column in the March 2007 issue of ISTE's Leading & Learning magazine that asks "Should Schools Regulate Offsite Online Behavior?" Nancy Willard argues for schools responding to cyberbulling (but not teacher bashing). Lynn Wietecha asks what can schools "reasonably" do.

My sense is there would need to a strong case made for the "disruptive to the educational process" just like any other student free-speech issue before a district would/should/could step in in any off-site student free speech issue, including nasty webpages about school personnel. A teacher's hurt feelings probably wouldn't qualify as disruptive (and, yes,  I know that sounds callous.)  Sometimes free speech is painful. 

Remember that I am not a lawyer although I sometimes pretend to be one on the Internet.

Does your district attempt to regulate off-site student speech? And how? 

Reactionary librarians aren't cute

I am having a very negative reaction to Travis Jonker's article "Fine. I Got an Ereader. Now What?: A newbie to digital reading gets his first Kindle" that appears in this month's School Library Journal.

While the personal narrative is cleverly written and certainly expresses the doubts, fears, and experiences many librarians have encountered in the move to e-books, I wonder why it has taken so long for Mr. Jonker to finally experience the e-reading experience. Why is SLJ making a cause celebre out of being a reactionary instead of being a leader in what may be the transition that either saves or eliminates school libraries?

Illustration removed at the request of Phyllis Mandell at SLJ. SLJ must be a little thin-skinned. 1-31-12

E-books have been in the professional conscious now for at least 15 years. The Kindle was first released in 2007 and there were e-readers pre-dating it. Heck, I even published an article in SLJ about e-books and their impact on libraries in 2004 and a column on the topic in 1995.

So yeah, I'm probably over-reacting and I'd be laughing hysterically had the subject been how a librarian has just now tried a new hairstyle that is not a bun. Had Mr. Jonker published this bit of nonsense in his personal journal, I'd a given it a polite smile, shook my head, and quietly thanked some higher power he is not my own grandchildren's librarian.

But SLJ owes it to its readers and our precarious profession to celebrate librarians who move us into the future in practical and positive ways. Do we really need our professional journals re-enforcing this stereotype of Luddite librarians. Seems others do that quite well for us already. New editor Miller, I hope this story was already in the pipeline before you took the helm.

Reactionary librarians aren't cute -  and they are positively dangerous. 

Elements of projects that motivate - Part 3 of 3

Here is another piece from my revision of The Indispensable Librarian. Your comments are welcome.

Elements of projects that motivate

Part One

Part Two

Why don’t all teachers design projects with some or all of these elements. Well, a 4^th “A” sneaks in.

(Teacher and Librarian) Attitude is Everything

1. Teachers and librarians who enjoy authentic, project-based learning are comfortable with a loss of control over time, the final product, and “correct” answers. If some parts of the curriculum don’t get “covered,” if conflicting evidence causes confusion, or a controversial solution to a problem is suggested, these educators roll with the punches. They have the intellectual confidence to handle ambiguity.
2. These teachers and librarians enjoy active students rather than passive students. They have developed new rules of behavior that stress student responsibility, and have trained their principals to differentiate between active learning and students out of control.
3. The professional’s belief that given enough time, resources, and motivation, all students are capable of high performance is critical. It’s not just the talented and gifted student who can make choices, solve problems creatively, and complete complex tasks. These teachers and librarians know that all students rise to the level of performance expected of them, and that great ideas can come from anyone in the class.
4. Like librarians, teachers who do exciting projects recognize that their expertise is in the learning and research process rather than in any particular subject area. No longer is the primary role of the educator that of information dispenser, but of guide for information users and creators. The happiest teachers and librarians are co-learners in the classroom, especially when learning new technology tools. And students get the satisfaction that comes from teaching as well.
5. Teacher and librarian enthusiasm becomes more important than ever. The best projects are always designed by teachers who are enthusiastic about what they are doing and how they are doing it. The downside to this is that it is very difficult to create recipes for specific projects that can be easily adopted by other teachers. We can all use principles and guidelines like the ones in this chapter, but to say a project, no matter how well designed, is going to work for every teacher, every librarian, or every group of students is impossible.
6. Teachers and librarians who work on these kinds of project know that they don’t always work the first time. But they keep trying.

Student projects must matter. The research needs to be important to the researcher. If it isn’t, students will go through the motions. And Johnson’s First Law of School Work will kick in: A job not worth doing is not worth doing well. One of the best things librarians can do is work very hard to make sure projects are well designed and intrinsically motivating. Use the rubric in below to evaluate the quality of your project. Every project should be at Level Three. Fortunate students will get to do a few Level Four tasks during their school years.

A Research Question Rubric: not all research questions are created equal.

Level One: My research is about a broad topic. I can complete the assignment by using a general reference source such as an encyclopedia. I have no personal questions about the topic.

Primary example: My research is about an animal.

Secondary example: My research is about the economy of Minnesota.

Level Two: My research answers a question that helps me narrow the focus of my search. This question may mean that I need to go to various sources to gather enough information to get a reliable answer. The conclusion of the research will ask me to give a supported answer to the question.

Primary example: What methods has my animal developed to help it survive?

Secondary example: What role has manufacturing played in Minnesota's economic development?

Level Three: My research answers a question of personal relevance. To answer this question I may need to consult not just secondary sources such as magazines, newspapers, books, or the Internet, but use primary sources of information such as original surveys, interviews, or source documents.

Primary example: What animal would be best for my family to adopt as a pet?

Secondary example: How can one best prepare for a career in manufacturing in the Duluth area?

Level Four: My research answers a personal question about the topic, and contains information that may be of use to decision-makers as they make policy or distribute funds. The result of my research is a well-supported conclusion that contains a call for action on the part of an organization or government body. There will be a plan to distribute this information.

Primary example: How can our school help stop the growth in unwanted and abandoned animals in our community?

Secondary example: How might high schools change their curricula to meet the needs of students wanting a career in manufacturing in Minnesota?

Enjoyable learning experiences that are both motivating and meaningful don’t just happen. They require thoughtful preparation and the conscious use of lessons learned from previous successful projects. All of us who work with students on projects need to keep asking ourselves questions like:

1. What are the barriers to better information and technology literacy projects?
2. How do we create meaningful assessment tools that can help us become more comfortable with ambiguity?
3. How do I make sure all students are intrinsically motivated to keep learning throughout their lives by finding, creating, evaluating, and using information?

Life-long learning is a reality all of us, student and librarian alike.