View the EDTECH Discussion Logs by month
View the Prior Message in EDTECH's June 2010 logs by: [date] [author] [thread]
View the Next Message in EDTECH's June 2010 logs by: [date] [author] [thread]
Visit the EDTECH home page.
Nancy wrote: "At this point in time, filtering is not effectively preventing student access..." There are many things this could mean. I'm curious which of them you do mean. Is your focus on what students are *capable* of? (I know that's not what you *literally* said, but it might be what you mean.) (1) All students are capable of bypassing filters. (2) Most students are capable of bypassing filters. (3) Properly clued-in students can bypass filters, but probably not even most of them know how to. And which is your claim: (4) Most students routinely, or often, do bypass filters. (5) Some (not most) students sometimes bypass filters. (etc.) Or does the claim have more to do with the fact that many students don't depend on school districts for internet access at all? (6) Most/some/a few students have connectivity through their phones or other devices and those devices are not filtered. Or is it something else? Web filtering policies depend crucially on what the purpose of web filters are. If it is to prevent all students from gaining access to verboten sites, they're total failures. If it is merely to create more friction, to lower the likelihood of access, and to create more of a focus on teacher-approved educational activities, then the filters surely do that, and they can do that without "effectively preventing student access," on whatever interpretation of that phrase you choose. My point really is that this is not a black-and-white issue and I am skeptical that it helps much to say vague things like "At this point in time, filtering is not effectively preventing student access, is preventing access to appropriate material, and will not be effective in managing use of interactive technologies." When you get down to brass tacks, your solution doesn't involve simply getting rid of all filters, right? I'm sure you don't recommend giving sixth graders unrestricted (i.e., unfiltered) access to porn sites, the worst hate sites, or sites that display horrific violence (not that I can think of any off hand, they must exist). Or is that what you're saying? I know you want there to be more oversight of student activity, of some sort, in place of the filter, but once that's in place, do you want to get rid of all filters, once doing so is legal? --Larry --- Edtech Archives, posting guidelines and other information are at: http://www.h-net.msu.edu/~edweb Please include your name, email address, and school or professional affiliation in each posting. To unsubscribe send the following command to: LISTSERV@H-NET.MSU.EDU SIGNOFF EDTECH