The following activity was designed for a graduate-level superintendent certification class.
The very nature of technology today is exceedingly fluid.
First, discuss the nuances between Google tools (blogger, Sites, Docs, YouTube etc.), social media (Facebook, Twitter, etc.), and Web 2.0 applications (Glogster, Animoto, Toondoo). How are they similar? How are they different?
Next, consider how the use of these digital age learning tools relate to the following legal considerations:
- Intellectual property
- Pupil records (assessment records)
- Copyright
- Disclosure of disability
- Security of the information collected
- Retention/deletion of the records/information
- Publishing of the information to a wider audience
- Right to privacy
- Endorsement (vs. disagreement or no expressed opinion)
Select one of the following AUPs.
Rate the degree to which your policy addresses the specific differences between the types of digital-age learning tools (above)?
Does your AUP address the legal considerations (above)? To what extent do they balance the educational need to leverage technology for powerful learning experiences with the legal need to comply with law and protect the teacher/school from liability?
Be prepared to discuss the strengths and weaknesses of your given AUP.
Forsyth County Schools, their video here.
Bellingham Public Schools
Barrington Public Schools
Duxbury School District
Littleton Public Schools: Student Use, Staff Use, Copyright/Fair Use
Burlington Public Schools
Science Leadership Academy
Resources:
CoSN's Acceptable Use Policies
WASB's Updating Student Internet Acceptable Use Policies
Los Angeles Unified School District: Social Media for Employees
WASB's Staff and Student Instructional Use of Social Media
Mike Julka at SLATE in 2010
Legal Issues Relating to Technology in Our Schools from WASDA on Vimeo.
Mike Julka's NOTES
BYOD Resources:
BYOD and Security
Moving Forward with BYOD
BYOD Questions to Consider
Sample Policy and Considerations
Wisconsin Records Retention Laws
Wisconsin Records Retention Schedule for School Districts
Credit: Wisconsin Association of School Boards, Association of Wisconsin School Administrators, Wisconsin Association of School District Administrators, CoSN
Rating for types of technology addressed:
ReplyDeleteGoogle Tools, Social Media & Web 2.0 -
* Doesn't explicitly mention creation of content (it does address copyright, plagarism, appropriate sharing, etc.) - examples below
* "Do not post or send any message/picture/sound/video that is obscene, rude, harassing or insulting to anyoned"
* "Do not forward or send any content not directly associated with your learning (e.g. advertisements, games, pictures)"
* "Peer to peer file sharing is strictly prohibited and monitored by the School District of Philadelphia - these software programs can be detected by the District and they will shut off your access to the SDP Network"
Intellectual property - Addresses Directly
Pupil records (assessment records) - Does not address (perhaps indirectly, but nothing about records of any type)
Copyright - Addresses Directly
Disclosure of disability - Indirectly
Security of the information collected - Directly
Retention/deletion of the records/information - Not at all
Publishing of the information to a wider audience - Directly
Right to privacy - Not at all (doesn't even have opt out clause)
Endorsement (vs. disagreement or no expressed opinion) - Not at all
Favorite Quote/Idea - Headings are in student language and terms such as:
*"No Fooling Around"
*"No Hogging,"
*"No Stealing"
Littleton Internet policy student
ReplyDeleteThe Internet is a fluid environment in which information available to students is constantly changing, and the District does not endorse any content or make any guarantee as to the accuracy of information or the appropriateness of any material accessible to students. It's statement is a direct quote out of the student policy. What I like about it is that it clearly articulates the constantly changing environment and that its students responsibility to validate the information.
The policy overall is well written including an opt out paragraph for the students if parent request of Internet material s In our review we didn't find anything on retention or deletion of student records
In looking at the Duxbury Acceptable Use Policy, I feel it does a nice job of covering Web 2.0 tools and keeping it broad enough to cover many different compenents of Web 2.0 tools. There is no specific language speaking to social media or google. As far as legal considerations, some of those pieces were missed. Missed pieces include endorsements, property ownership, and deletion of materials from WEb 2.0 tools. A favorite line outlined the importance of the use of technology in public schools. "Duxbury Public School (DPS) provides access to electronic
ReplyDeleteresources that promote educational excellence, sharing of information, innovative
instruction, and online communication to enhance Millennial Learners’ ability to live and
work in the 21st century."
Update on Tools from Tool Rating, above
ReplyDeleteEmail/Chatting Etiquette
Communicating online is is very much like communicating with people in person. You must be respectful of others at all times. Remember that all email & M.O.O.D.L.E. messages can be read by the SLA Technology Team and the administration. Donʼt write anything you would not want to share with teachers and parents.
While many members of SLA, including staff members, use instant messaging and blogging software to communicate, part of the learning experience at SLA is to responsibly use these types of communication methods as part of your school day. Students need to be aware that chatting during class time when off topic is a distraction. Students asked to refrain from using or quit using chatting during class time must do so immediately.