Posted on

How to: Scare away quality teachers

This makes me ill. I realize that school boards are often made up of individuals who don't personally use tools such as Facebook, instant messaging, Skype, etc. I also realize that the disconnect between personal understanding of these tools by those that determine school district policy is quite often responsible for schools to be behind the curve in their utilization of technology. While I do push for change where I can in my own school, I've come to an uneasy acceptance that many decisions being made on the technological front are being made by individuals who aren't knowledgeable enough on the topic to make the best decisions for our students. Excessive filtering of internet content and the banning of cell phones are two indicators of that reality.

Then there's this:

School Board members voted Feb. 10 to finalize a policy banning communication between Elmbrook staff and students on social networking Web sites and instant messaging services, after deciding against a much more restrictive policy.

[...] The approved rule, essentially bans "personal communication via nondistrict-sponsored applications/devices between staff and students, including, but not limited to, the use of social networking sites and instant messaging."

(from the article Board finalizes policy on teacher-student communication by Isral DeBruin)

Thirteen months ago I wrote a post explaining my disdain when the Ohio Education Association recommended that teachers delete their MySpace and Facebook profiles. I won't repeat what I said there, though if you haven't read it already, check it out. Much of what I said there applies to this story as well. However, the recent decision by the Elmbrook School District Board is much worse¹.

The need to control

The reasoning is explained by (ex-)Elmbrook School Board member Chris Thompson: "There is absolutely no reason that any teacher right now should be on Facebook with their students. You cannot control it."

By banning communication between staff and students over social network sites and instant messaging, the board is effectively saying they don't believe teachers and students should communicate outside of class because that environment is uncontrollable. When I run into students at a restaurant, at the mall, on the sidewalk, at the beach (where I may even see students in *gasp* a bathing suit), or anywhere else, it is a situation that is out of the district's control.

According to the Elmbrook School Board's logic, they should ban those encounters as well. Thompson notes when using Facebook, "you're putting yourself out there, and it's a risk." Yes, there is a risk. The same risk I take when going to any public place where I might run into students. Simply because it's a virtual space doesn't mean everyone starts acting inappropriately.

What upsets me the most about the policy is the lack of respect it gives to the district's staff. The Elmbrook School Board obviously doesn't feel that its staff members are capable of interacting with students without someone looking over their shoulder. The school board feels it needs to be there to prevent anything unsightly from happening.

There are risks associated with social network sites and instant messaging. They aren't more risky than face to face encounters- it's just a different form of the same risk. If my district trusts me enough to put me essentially unsupervised in a room full of teenagers for 90 minutes, then they need to trust me enough to be able to act appropriately when I run into the students outside of that room- no matter if that contact occurs face to face or online.

A better option

Chris Lehmann wrote a post in October describing a conversation he had with a student on Facebook. The purpose behind his post had nothing to do with using Facebook to communicate with students, but he ended by sagely noting:

Oh... and yes, this all happened because kids and teachers "friended" each other. These are the conversations we can have when we all remember that we have to interact as people, not as subject and object, and not just teacher and student. If and when the technology facilitates that, all the better. (emphasis mine)

Tools such as Facebook and instant messaging allow for teachers and students to "interact as people;" to foster positive relationships. The MacArthur Foundation's report, Living and Learning with New Media points to these tools as positive forces in the education of students:

Contrary to adult perceptions, while hanging out online, youth are picking up basic social and technological skills they   need to fully participate in contemporary society. Erecting barriers to participation deprives teens of access to these forms of learning. Participation in the digital age means more than being able to access “serious” online information and culture. Youth could benefit from educators being more open to forms of experimentation and social exploration that are generally not characteristic of educational institutions. (emphasis mine)

Will Richardson notes that in order to use these tools effectively "we have to understand it for ourselves." Instead of banning social network sites and instant messaging, perhaps school boards should ban the creation of policies for things they don't understand.

____________________________________________________________

¹ Even more damning: Some school board members wanted a much more restrictive policy "which would have banned district staff from using text messaging, instant messaging and social networking altogether, even personally while off the clock."  I'm not sure that'd be legal.

____________________________________________________________

Hat tip to Elissa Hoffman who tweeted a link to the article.

Posted on

Making my case for unfiltration: Images

I'm trying to convince my district to lax their filtration policies. Currently all blogs, social media sites, image hosting or searching sites, and many other online tools are blocked. I've met with and sent out emails to our tech directors and principals explaining my concerns. So far I haven't received any response to my emails and my face to face meetings haven't yielded any progress. I've decided to send out one email a week to the tech directors and principals explaining why various online tools should be unblocked. I'm also trying to work other angles (Curriculum directors, School Improvement Team) as well.  Here's this week's episode.

Image Hosting and Searching

Reasons for images being blocked (as I understand it)

Many image hosting (Flickr, Picasa, etc.) and searching applications (Google Images, Yahoo Images), even with a “Safe Search” setting turned on, will still occasionally turn up  inappropriate images. As a district, we want to prevent these images from being accessible to our students.

Reasons for unblocking image hosting sites and searching

Humans, by nature, are visually oriented. As a species we’ve been honed to analyze visual information for as long as there have been humanoids on the planet. Written language and text is a much more recent invention than sight. While it is an effective method of communication, visual stimuli trumps text-based stimuli in our brains. Therefore, students pay more attention (and generally learn better) when they are visually engaged or are able to exhibit their knowledge through visual modalities.

The ability to search for Creative Commons licensed or other fair use images allows students and staff to publish their work online. One major hurdle that has to be overcome to legally publish content online are copyright laws. However Flickr allows people to publish their image under Creative Commons (CC) licenses (here’s my photostream). These CC licenses can allow third parties to legally use and republish their images in any format. There are several web sites that allow you to easily search the content on Flickr for CC-licensed images (Flickr’s own, Blue Mountain, Comp-Fight). As a result, I can publish presentations online for students and other teachers to access from anywhere without having to worry about copyright infringement. Students can publish projects and other works online; accessing a global audience for feedback on their work. Research is heavy with studies showing how authentic publication of student work increases student performance.

Students can create high quality projects. Previously, I have had students create artifacts of their learning to demonstrate their understanding of the concepts being covered in class. Invariably, high quality projects include images. What good is a text-based description of a stratovolcano when you can have images of real stratovolcanoes? Why simply have a description of what the element lead looks like when you can also have a picture of lead.

Filters generally won’t be an obstacle in any other environment. I am not suggesting we unblock everything and let students do whatever they’d like online. However, most students are accessing the unfiltered internet at home. When students graduate from Fitch they will go on to educational and professional settings that will more likely that not either not have filters or have very lax filtration. In many of those places, student computer use is unsupervised. In school, all student computer use is supervised. This provides us with a wonderful opportunity to teach students how to work with sites where they may run into objectionable content. As a school, we should be jumping at the chance to teach students skills they’ll be using the rest of their lives. Instead, we’re running away from one of the best lessons we can teach our students.

Again, I thank you for your time. I feel that we need to have an open discussion concerning filtering policies concerning what is best for our students.

Posted on

Caught on YouTube

The NEA recently posted an article about teachers who have been unknowingly taped digitally recorded by their students who then posted the videos online. The article mentions some cases where teachers are clearly acting inappropriately. However, it also mentions a few cases in which the video clip was taken out of context or edited in a manner that created the appearance of unprofessional behavior.

The article goes on to describe how one might go about requesting videos be taken off of YouTube, and right near the end it states:

Problem is, kids aren't always responsible. That's why cell phones and other digital media should be banned in classrooms, advises NEA General Counsel Michael Simpson. He also suggests that schools make it a punishable offense to post a video of another student or teacher without that person's permission.

But the safest course of action is to prevent students from capturing humiliating or damning video in the first place.

Questions

  • Why is the first reaction to this "ban 'em all?" Shouldn't we recommend first that teachers not go on mad rampages, call students hateful names, or physically assault students?
  • How do you teach students to use digital cameras responsibly?
  • Is it inherently a bad thing to record a teacher in their classroom without their permission?
  • Is it ever OK to post video of a person online without their permission?

Comments

  • The suggestion to ban cell phones based upon these instances seems lacking to me. There seems to be two classifications of video recording according to this article: (1) students purposely trying to get teachers fired, and (2) students recording honest-to-goodness atrocities committed by teachers. The first group of students aren't going to be affected by a ban. They're clearly looking to create trouble. I doubt a ban on cell phones would prevent their mischief. As for the second group, I have a hard time believing that what they're doing is all that wrong. It's very likely that when students make serious accusations of teacher misconduct their complaints are fully believed. So to prove their point, they get hard evidence.
  • This is a tough issue. Take five 30-second clips of my worst teaching moments throughout a year and play it back to me. I'd be horribly embarrassed, feel like a terrible person, and anyone you'd show it to would believe that as well.
  • I don't think teachers should live in fear of being taped. I think teachers should be comfortable with anyone see them teach at anytime. What's to hide? I realize we all have bad moments, but as a profession we should be striving for transparency and professionalism. Teachers should be managing their classrooms in such a manner that being covertly video taped won't turn up any dirt.

What do you think?

Check out the NEA article. Is my thinking on track? Or am I a certified wacko? Have you ever been caught on tape (for good or ill)? Is banning cell phones the way to handle this issue? Am I wrong to not be very sympathetic towards many of these teachers being taped?

Posted on

Social networking sites pose "dangers" for educators?

No networking!The Ohio Education Association (OEA) put out a memo this fall strongly advising teachers to completely and totally avoid social networking sites. The OEA's memo states:

"OEA advises members not to join MySpace or Facebook, and for existing users to complete the steps involved in removing their profiles. While this advice might seem extreme, the dangers of participating in these two sites outweigh the benefits."

What exactly are the "dangers" you ask? There are two main threats the OEA is concerned about, according to the article in eSchoolNews.Threat #1: “The fact that a student can attempt to contact an OEA member who has a profile on these sites lends itself to the possible interpretation of an improper relationship."Threat #2: "The union is worried students will create 'imposter' sites, pose as adults and engage in conversation with teachers, or use online communication to make allegations later against educators." The union pointed to an investigative report printed in the Columbus Dispatch which found at least three MySpace profiles by people claiming to be Ohio educators that had inappropriate content, and some had students listed as their "friends" within the MySpace community.My thoughts on the "threats:"

  • I wholeheartedly agree that inappropriate relationships between students and educators is despicable, and educators who engage in such relationships should be relieved of their jobs.
  • The OEA doesn't seem to have much confidence in its members. I am confident that the vast majority of teachers understand the difference between an appropriate and inappropriate relationship despite the medium through which the relationship occurs. However, the OEA seems to assume that as soon as someone goes online their moral compass simply disappears.
  • In a somewhat related strain, MySpace & Facebook get blamed for inappropriate behavior by their users. In fact, the social networking sites may have helped school officials find teachers having inappropriate relationships before any felonious misconduct occurred. If these teachers didn't have MySpace profiles, how long would the inappropriate relationships continued before they were found out?
  • Threat #2 states students may pose as adults lure teachers into having inappropriate conversations. I'd recommend that when you're talking to someone you don't really know online (or even someone you do), don't have inappropriate conversations. I don't feel this is a threat unique to educators. Again, MySpace and Facebook get blamed for poor decision on the part of their users.
  • Threat #2 comes close to making a good point, but it seems to get sidetracked. It is possible for anyone to create a profile pretending to be you. If the creators of the profile then use the profile in an unbecoming manner it could seriously tarnish your image and cause plenty of negative attention to come your way. While law enforcement would more than likely be able to determine that you didn't create or use the profile, you'd have to have law enforcement involved, which means you're probably already in trouble. Possibly the best way to avoid this would be for educators to create their own profiles and utilize tools such as ClaimID so others would have more difficulty hijacking their (hopefully) good name (see this post by Wes Fryer for more on ClaimID).

The biggest problem I have with OEA's memo is it suggests sticking our heads in the sand rather than dealing with the real problem. There are safety issues when using online communication, but the decision to entirely shun social networking sites is moving in the wrong direction. Schools could be a place were students and teachers can learn together how to utilize these tools safely, instead of a place where they're told how scary and awful they are and that they should never be used. Too many school officials, teachers, and parents are frightened of technology in the classroom because all they hear is negative press about all the horrible things that can happen. What ends up happening is students miss out on powerful tools (other than simply MySpace and Facebook) that could enrich their learning both in and out of school.I'm not suggesting that MySpace and Facebook should be used to teach classes. I simply believe there is too much fear mongering about the horrible dangers of online environments. Will Richardson makes the point much better in his post, "Social Networks (No) vs. Social Tools (Yes) in Schools":

"Often in my presentations I ask how many folks are teaching MySpace or Facebook in their schools. Not teaching with MySpace, but teaching the literacies of networking through the lens of a [social networking site]. Rarely do more than a few hands go up. I wonder what would happen if we contextualized our approach not in the fears that our kids will get themselves in trouble by using these sites but, instead, in the spirit of encouraging them to experience the socialization that [has otherwise been taken away]. Not that we invade their spaces or friend them, but that we acknowledge the importance of Facebook in their lives, stop pretending like it doesn’t exist, and include it in the discussion of what’s important in life."

Too right, Will. It's time for school officials to realize that social networking sites and other online collaboration tools (wikis, blogs, etc.) aren't a fad that will soon fade away. Schools often seem so afraid of change; whenever something new comes along it's banned or blocked before its merits can be determined. Wouldn't it be wonderful if schools were led by digitally literate teachers, principals, and officials who strove to introduce technology to students instead of the other way around?I wasn't planning writing this long post, but obviously it struck a nerve. I'd love to hear some of your critiques and extensions on the topic.