Reflecting on the AUP

For our final project, my group chose to rework ISB's Acceptable Use Policy (AUP) for information technology.  We began with the school's current AUP, a well thought-out document written by our HS Technology Coordinator.

We began by reading many AUPs from different schools with different emphases.  We tried to get a sense of what issues most AUPs address, what tone they take, and what the purposes the document serves for the different groups who may read and use it, including students, teachers, parents, and administrators. 

Some of the issues we thought through and our efforts to improve the document are explored below:

The purpose of the AUP

We determined that the AUP serves at least three major purposes:

1. A statement of philosophy regarding how information technology should be used at our school
2. An educational document for members of the school community explaining in some detail how they can meet the standards of acceptable use
3. A reference for determining disciplinary action when students use IT in unacceptable ways

A Central Theme

Respect was the central theme of the original AUP and one that we could not improve on.  Every aspect of the AUP can be related back to this one idea. This was broken down into two subtopics "Respect Yourself" (think before sharing personal information, value your own work, etc.) and "Respect Others" (keep the equipment in good order so that others have access and to respect the hard work of the network managers, don't post information about others without permission, support intellectual property rights, etc.)

In addition to providing a cohesive element to the document, "respect" also leads to explanations of why we have standards of acceptable use.  Students are more likely to follow the standards if they think there is a good reason and buy into the philosophy behind it.  Discussing respect allows us to make those reasons explicit.

Striking a Positive Tone

We wanted to emphasize that students are encouraged to use the school's IT resources, and that they can be used in creative ways to further learning.  The original AUP did this by stating that our school provides many IT resources in support of learning.  In order to explain a bit further, we added a paragraph that tied our ideas directly to ISB's (newly revised) Vision and Mission Statement as well as ISTE's National Education Technology Standards.

An Educational Document

Mr. Harter had already done an excellent job of telling students how to meet the standards of acceptable use, including giving instructions on how to change passwords, prevent the spread of viruses, etc.  Although we had originally hoped to create a shorter document, it soon became clear that we could not do so without sacrificing the educational aspect of the AUP.

Discipline in the AUP

This was a topic that I gave a lot of thought to at first, after reading in class about Avery Doninger (a high school student whose family sued after she was prohibited from running for student office as punishment for posting a blog that called administrators insulting names and encouraged members of the community to swamp the office with calls in order to "piss them off"). 

As a private school, ISB has broad authority over the types of punishments it can impose for behaviors inside or outside of school.  It is not bound by US public school's requirement to provide equal educational opportunities.  A quick look through ISB's handbook makes it clear that we don't need to be concerned when writing the AUP with whether students are in or out of school; the school already asserts the right to act on out-of-school behaviors.

At first I was unsure about how specific to be in describing discipline for various infractions, and how to moderate the necessarily negative tone with the overall positive and educational goals of the AUP.  However, given how unique each circumstance is and how quickly technologies change, we decided to just have a single disciplinary catch-all phrase that would allow administrators the greatest leeway in determining how to respond.

Intellectual Property Rights

The AUP already contained a statement about the legal use of software and other files.  We added a statement about plagiarism, which, though addressed in detail elsewhere in the students handbook, seemed highly relevant.

Emerging Issues

Recently the HS Librarian, Mr. Rubis, suggested a list of technologies to be (further) covered explicitly in the AUP, such as cloud computing, downloads and streaming media. We struggled with that naming of specific technologies as opposed to the possibilities they allow.  It is difficult to strike a balance between the length of the document, its educational value, its specificity (in terms of overly proscriptive restrictions what one can do versus providing clear guidelines) and it's relevance (since specific references may be quickly outdated).

Perhaps the comments from Mr. Rubis can refocus our attention on possibilities we may have overlooked.  

Update

We met again to discuss the input we received and made some further changes including:

• adding some technologies by name that are of concern to those working in the library
• adding more detail about how to protect others (not forwarding, publishing, or otherwise sharing information send in private without permission)
• adding a statement in the "consequences" section about keeping to the spirit of the agreement and making it explicit that students will be held accountable for their actions whether specifically discussed in the AUP or not
• replacing some weak language with clearer and more precise wording

Our next step will be to see if this AUP works for the administration of the school.  I would also like to discuss the policy with some students to get their feedback before a final document in adopted.   

As we continue to rework the AUP, we will consider all forms of input and further research and hopefully come up with a final document that will serve the needs of all members of the community.

Thanks for the image found on flickr.

Digital Footprints

This week's essential question is: When and where should we be teaching students about their digital footprint?

Our face-to-face (f2f) meeting this week included Ms. Silvia Tolisano's fascinating presentation about the nature of one’s presence online presence, or "digital footprint". She emphasized that we have moved beyond the time where "digital invisibility" is a reasonable expectation for students... or even a desirable one.

Educators vary widely in their understanding of digital footprints and the emerging technologies that make them possible. Those "in-the-know" may offer advice or informal instruction, but these efforts can not be counted upon to reach all students. At my school there is little in the curriculum about online behavior other than plagiarism. Formal efforts to raise student awareness about digital footprints and cyberbullying include showing a video (see below) in which a hard copies of girl's picture are subsituted for the digital image, showing how it is impossible to remove.



This is a crucial lesson, especially for the younger grades, but is it, alone, the best approach? As with all social and global issues, we want children to understand the seriousness of our message, but we must not frighten or upset them so much that they shut the information out and ignore it. In this case, we must be careful not to engender a feeling of helplessness, especially in students whose social lives are inseparable from online media and who may not be willing to give up their online activites for safety. There is some evidence of this attitude. In his article on digital footprints and employment, Fields Mosley quotes a man who refuses to worry about his online footprint because, he says, it's beyond his control.

So, what about our students who have already made these indelible errors? What about those who, for whatever reason, are unwilling to curtail their online antics?

There are always steps one can take to improve one’s online image. In her online article, Kim Komando suggests (among other things) highlighting positive achievements online, encouraging links to these, and constructive blogging about one’s passions. This has the double benefit of showing off one's accomplishments and pushing any negative links out of the top search results.

How important is all of this to our students? A clearly written article in admissions.com cites Kaplan research showing that 10% of college admissions offices reported looking up applicants on facebook. Other social networking sites, googling, and so on are also commonly used by universities and prospective employers and the numbers seem likely to increase.

As educators, we should go beyond the teaching about the dangers of online life. Clearly, student safety is the first priority and these lessons have their place. However, we should augment our instruction with information about the benefits a digital footpring might have on college admissions or hiring. Imagine googling a young applicant to find not evidence of drinking and immature behaviors, but a blog ongoing involvement with a subject of interest like music, community service, or biology. One can easily imagine the extra boost such a result might give in the increasingly competitive admissions and hiring offices.

The place for these lessons is not as obvious to me. Some possible ideas include a few classes (perhaps in the freshman seminar my school offers) for early high schoolers on not just erasing or sanitizing, but estabilshing their digital footprint, along with all the safety instruction about identity protection, social networking behaviors, online predators and so on. The counselling office could work with all college-bound juniors and all seniors research and improves their digital footprints. Then the students would be empowered to make sure the image they're projecting (safely) to the world is the one they want their prospective schools and employers to see.

Thanks for the image found through creative commons.