Thank you, Mr. Jobs

As half-time librarian and half-time English teacher in a small junior-high school, I found an Apple II computer sitting on my desk at the beginning of the 1982 school year. I was pretty darned mad that 1) somebody had decided the school needed a computer in the first place, 2) the library budget was used to buy it, and, 3) I was supposed to be the one to figure out the dumb thing. After three rather frustrating days, I produced my first half-page memo using AppleWriter, a daisywheel printer and more patience than I ever thought I could muster. But by the time I finished the memo, I was deeply in love with the little machine.

The Apple II and its word processing program, both primitive by today's standards, was a writer's dream. It compensated for my bad spelling and handwriting. I could revise without retyping a whole document. My printed documents looked professional. Wow! Then a little light bulb appeared over my head. "I teach 75 kids every day who struggle with their writing too. If this thing helps me, just think what it might do for them!" I couldn't wait to share my enthusiasm with my 7th graders and my fellow teachers.

Over the past 30 years, I've fallen in love quite a number of times with these silicon-enhanced creatures and their abilities - no small number created by Apple - and my career, for better or worse, changed the day the Apple II appeared on my desk. The light about helping regular teachers and student empower themselves with technology has never gone off.

Thank you, Mr. Jobs. 

Checking the filter

This is our district's 30-second survey for the week:

I'll blog the results at the end of the week.

Such a check is long overdue. The last formal study I did on the efficacy of our Internet filter was in 2002 - about a year and a half after first installing it in our district. Here is the report (yes, I keep a lot of junk):

An experiment in evaluating a filter

I took some time over the school’s winter break in December of 2002 (15-18 hours) to do a quick breakdown of the report from our district filtering system (Webblocker/Cyberpatrol set to block only full nudity and sexual acts within our WatchGuard firewall). The study is of blocked sites from 6 am to 6 pm on Dec 19, 2002 - a regular school day.

A total of 617,000 requests were made from our district of 6800 students and 800 staff members using about 2500 networked computers on Dec 19th. Of these, 592 requests were blocked. (.001%) By eliminating duplicate requests (same URL within a 5 minute spread of time from the same IP address), the unique instances of blocking was reduced to 262. I checked each blocked URL by copying it from the log into my browser (also checking the root IP address if the specific page was blocked), then categorizing what I found as follows:

SEX = Strong sexual content. 100 attempts blocked. Of these 72 came from a single machine within a 2.5 hour time period - we believe this was the result of the CODE RED virus.

T = Tasteless. 9 attempts blocked

NOC* = No offensive content. 78 attempts blocked

PNF = Page or server not found. 72 attempts blocked

STU=Site temporarily unavailable 3 attempts blocked

*NOC details - 14 AOL blocks, 11 banner ads, 6 commercial music sites, 3 Italian pages, 12 search engine sites, 1 medical (questionable - female ejaculation, non-prurient, personal site), 3 plugin download sites, 3 webhosting sites, 3 gambling, 22 misc.

Since we use DHCP to assign IP numbers to computers throughout the district, we cannot precisely tell where each of these requests originated. But due to our VPN IP assignment scheme, I can tell:

107 requests came from a technician's machine (the one with the virus), 3 requests (no sexual ones) came from staff computers, 155 requests came from lab/student machines, and 1 came from a machine with a static IP in a high school of unknown whereabouts.

By building type:

Elementary buildings 26

High school 44

Middle school 10

Combined HS/JH 61

Area alternative high school/community ed/early childhood building 121 (107 virus related)

Questions for me that still remain:

1. Why are so many URLs blocked that return File Not Found errors when searched for with a browser?
2. How can I determine "leakage" of the filter - if users are getting to inappropriate sites that the filter does not catch? Why after 18 months of having a filter are users still trying to get to sites with "sexual acts" if they do not think they have at least some hope of success?
3. How does one determine "intentionality" of attempts to get to sites that are inappropriate? How many of these requests were to porn-napped sites? How many made by kids in error? I have no way of knowing if users were purposely looking for sites that are not permitted in our AUP (with the exception of a couple instances where a single machine made multiple requests over a short period of time for such material.)
4. How successful was I in convincing my wife that I was doing "official school business" after seeing a few of the images on my computer screen?

Conclusions:

1. At least in this "snapshot," it does not appear that our filter is grossly overblocking sites. At a blocking rate of less than .001% and with only 78 requests for non-offensive pages denied, I see this as tolerable.
2. To the extent that I am able to determine, the filter is blocking many inappropriate sites. Most of what I checked, I believe, even the most ardent civil libertarian would agree does not belong in schools. Heck, I had to wash MY eyes out with soap after viewing some of this stuff. I would say that about half the blocked requests for sex sites were for "doorway" pages - a non-explicit page with a strict warning not to enter if under 18.
3. This is a very time consuming process, most of it checking and categorizing the blocked URLs. I am not sure how this could be simplified without putting a good deal of control into the hands of the filtering manufacturers.

Will the 30-second survey do as good (or better) job in helping the department determine if our filter is over or under blocking?

How does your district determine if its filter is working the way it ought to?

Thinking in public

"It doesn't make any difference what you do in the bedroom as long as you don't do it in the street and frighten the horses." - Mrs. Patrick Campbell

The anniversary of the Blue Skunk blog came and went last August while I was on vacation. Since August 8, 2005 I have written 1,628 posts* - some which have gone on to lead happy lives as columns, articles and even book chapters. Thank you, thank you to everyone who reads and especially to those who take time to comment on my ramblings.

This thinking in public is a terrible personal indulgence, but paradoxically it's one that more "reflective practitioners" ought to do.

Why this blog...

Dear Readers,

I created this blog reluctantly. Blogging seems so trendy and as anyone who has seen my clothes and haircut knows, I am not a trendy person.

My current, established website seems to be useful to others. I post my "real" articles, columns and workshop materials there often. It has an effective search engine. People can find out how to contact me there. It's my professional face.

So the question remains, why in the devil do I need a blog? I’m somewhat reluctant to share my personal life since it has only two speeds - boring and embarrassing. Intellectually, it’s about all I can do to come up with enough cogent thoughts for published columns and articles.

What I did not have before the Blue Skunk was a convenient way for people to respond to my writing or presentations. This blog affords such a means. It serves as a sounding board for ideas I am currently thinking/writing about. You may see some Blue Skunk entries as parts of a published article or book.

As it's turned out, I've continued to write simply because it has been so dang much fun. I amuse myself on a fairly regular basis, and if when doing so I amuse you as well, so much the better. I love the comments - both contrary and supportive. And I enjoy the simple freedom of having no editor other than one's own conscience.

Be aware, of course, that the opinions expressed in this blog are mine alone and do not reflect those of my school district, my children, nor totally rational human beings.

Please continue to read and add your your thoughts to the Blue Skunk. But as always, keep them clean - my mother reads this. You never know - your mother might be reading it too.

All the very best,

Doug

Oh, Blue Skunk? As I understand it, early explorers attempted to give this part of Minnesota the Lakota name for “blue earth” - mah-kah-toe. Somehow this got changed to man-kay-toe, the Lakota word for “blue skunk.”

I like the image and the lesson about how easily things get lost in translation.

* This pales in comparison to Richard Byrne's 5,000 posts on his Free Technology for Teachers blog in under four years. Being young has its advantage - I'll bet he can stay awake past 9:30 at night.