Showing posts with label education. Show all posts
Showing posts with label education. Show all posts

Sunday, March 15, 2009

Privately at odds with Privacy Issues

I gave my privacy away the day I became a mother. No matter where I am in the house, one of my 3 boys finds me. I never imagined washing my hair with a 5 year old on the other side of the shower curtain telling me all the details of his Star Wars Transformer. But, it has happened, and it seems like I'm never alone. And yes, someone is always watching me or listening to what I say.
This week's topic about Privacy has made me realize that I am also being watched on-line. Everything I do on-line is being recorded somewhere. But in the grand scheme of things, does it really matter?

After watching the video Does what happens in the Facebook stay in the Facebook? I was a little shocked that Facebook wants all rights to anything I post there. It doesn't seem very socially polite of them, if you catch my drift (I'm a firm believer in social netiquette). I was also extremely interested in the negative comments regarding this video. One of the cleanest comments (there were several with profanities that I came across) reads as follows:



. . . what exactly does this person put on their facebook that they don't want
other companies to see? For that matter, what does ANYONE put on their facebook
that they don't want others to see? God forbid that they give away the pictures
of her at her college reunion! The only thing anybody would want with your
information is surveys. Do you care that people you don't know know you read
Harry Potter? (Comment posted by nommayomnom 2 weeks ago)

This got me thinking:

Do I care if my information is used in surveys? No. It's a little creepy to think my information is being shared without my knowledge, but I don't post information that I want to keep private anyway, so why does it matter?

Do I care if people know what I read? No. If I post a book on Shelfari that I've read, I'm aware that it's out there for people to see. If I did care, I wouldn't mention it.

Would I care if they gave my photos of my children away? This is where I do care. I believe it's common courtesy to be asked before photos are used elsewhere. I would probably get a little upset if I saw pictures of my children published without my consent. I have to weigh the possibilities of this happening with the joy of sharing with friends and family.

Should I share this knowledge about privacy with staff and students? Probably. I think that it is good to help others be aware of what rights they are giving up while using social networking sites like Facebook, but I think we have to realize that a lot of them simply don't care.

So, why is it a non-issue for some, while others feel so strongly against the lack of privacy that they refuse to use Facebook and such? I realized earlier today while muddling through this issue that there is a lack of urgency for many youth regarding on-line privacy. Look at their privacy role models - Paris Hilton is the one star who comes to mind with regards to their privacy being violated on-line. And look what happened to her - fame. Ms. Hilton has not been jumping on the privacy bandwagon as a result of this experience. As far as I can tell, she hasn't been asked to do school visits to spread the word about protecting your privacy on-line.

Deeper Reasons for Protecting our Privacy Rights

I think we can all agree that there are more serious issues on-line than simple marketing surveys.

In the video clip, Facebook Killed the Private Life, Clay Shirky (author of Here Comes Everybody) asks us to comtemplate: "what are we going to say as a society about looking into other people's lives?" Is it right for employers and schools to search out information about you on Facebook and Myspace?




The most relevant piece of information about privacy that stood out for me from this interview was Shirky's comment about the effects of technology on ones private life:

"What the technology makes possible is colliding with our social sense of this
kind of semi public, semi-private sphere - that's what is being contested,that's
what being fought over. The most serious negative consequence of this is: if we
don't carve out some space for documented personal action that's okay, then we
will really have robbed young people of something they won't even know they're
missing because they never leave the web of surrveillance. "
When it comes right down to the bottom line - there is no bottom line. We have never experienced such a blurring of private and public life before - so we don't know all the answers.
For me, I've been witnessing 2 types of response:

1. Engage in a knee-jerk reaction saying to avoid Facebook and Myspace - such as the recent warning from B.C. College of Teachers (see, Warning for teachers: Facebook can kill career).

2. A proceed with caution approach- and with an awareness that whatever you post can be viewed by anyone, and possibly misunderstood or misinterpreted.

As an educator, I definitely think we should be engaging in these conversations with our staff and students. I also believe this is just the beginning. As a parent I will continue to educate my own children as they grow up with this "web of surveillance" (Shirky) using Doug Johnson's sage advice as presented in Lighting Lamps:

  • Write assuming your boss is reading
  • Gripe Globally; praise locally
  • Write for edited publications.
  • Write out of goodness.

I appreciate Johnson's straight-forward manner, and his words are quite wise. These guiding principals to on-line writing could easily be shared with staff, students, and probably pre-service teachers as well.

If we traverse the web of surveillance with knowledge and awareness, and follow guiding principles like Johnson's, I believe many of us can enjoy the benefits of on-line writing and sharing, while at the same time model the public/private balancing act for our students and children.

Saturday, January 31, 2009

Random Thoughts from the Dark Side - Filtering Digital Education

For a while I was on the fence again. I couldn't decide which side of the filters debate I stood on. Are filters really bad, evil, horrible things that spell out "censorship" if played backwards? Or, are they a common-sense safety issue, much like asking your child to put their helmet on before they go for a bike ride? After much thought I've decided I'm against the over-use of filters. I feel that a little filtering should be in place, especially for very young learners, but that no filter is ever going to replace sound teaching. And any filter that stands in the way of teaching and learning, is a dangerous thing.

The Dark Side of Filtering - Enter Darth Filterer

I have moments of concern about the false sense of security that filters create. I am suspicious of the fear-mongering that educators are forced to endure when it comes to their
student's safety. And, I shake my head at the notion of protecting adolescents from themselves (as if MySpace and Facebook were some sort of Lord of the Flies scenario waiting to happen.)
If I were artistic, I might ink out a little cartoon of a line-up of kids leaving a school, covered from head to toe in bubble wrap. Their eyes have blinders on, and their ears are stuffed with cotton. The heading might read, "Since the filters couldn't go with them...."

In this weeks readings, one statement stood out above the rest (most likely because I had never heard anyone approach filtering in this way before). Stephen Abram's suggests, in his article,
Justifying the Social Tools: Improving the Conversation (2007), that we should really question what is being blocked and why:


"Those folks who choose to block social networking sites for good reasons should be required to make those reasons explicit and to prove how their approach encourages good learning results and doesn't over-reach. I've seen too many
instant messaging sites banned for vague or unsupportable reasons such as viruses or stalkers."
I agree that it is important to question what learning opportunities are being compromised by the sites that are blocked. But, I wonder who will argue against excuses such as virus prevention and threat of stalkers? It is like a trump card held by the powers that be, and it seems the only counter-argument strong enough to challenge over-zealous blocking is to argue that filtering itself is unsafe.

Mary Ann Bell argues this exact point in I'm Mad and I'm Not Gonna Take it Anymore (2008). Bell says, "[n]ot allowing access can be dangerous, as it keeps us from teaching kids to be safe and smart online when they are on their own" (p.3). Also, educators seldom state that the real dangers on the Net happen to kids outside of school. Filtering in school, then, seems more about educators wearing the blinders instead of the students. If the issues don't come up in the classroom, then maybe they don't exist - or, if they don't come up, then we won't have to deal with them. To me this approach screams of negligence at the highest level.


Students worlds are different then when we were in school, but the big scary issues have always been there (sexual predators, bullies, etc.). We can't hide our heads in the sand when it comes to these issues, and blocking them out is like closing the door to the skeletons in our societal closet and denying they exist. To me, it is imperative that we are open and honest with students, that we discuss safe on-line behaviour frequently. That we invite students into the discussions about their own on-line safety, instead of having the fight for them with regards to safe or unsafe filtering.

The Annoying Side of Filtering - My Light Saber Won't Work!

The school division I worked for last year had very strict filtering levels in place. I felt like I was constantly running up against roadblocks in my teaching. I was told that if I wanted a site unblocked, I had to apply for a tech request to lift the block. This seems easy enough to do, but when you are juggling all that has to be juggled in the ordinary day to day of teaching in a school library, that extra step becomes a nuisance. Needing to send a tech request in for a 3 minute video to be unblocked seemed ludicrous and a waste of everyone's time.

I found it very frustrating to work in this overly-filtered environment where many Web 2.0 tools could not be used or viewed. I resented the fact that the "higher ups" didn't have enough faith in my own professional judgment to either:

  1. Unblock sites myself that I needed for educational purposes.
  2. Have someone at my school remove the block.
  3. Be trusted to direct students to safe, educational, curriculum-related sites.


Further Random Thoughts

  • Internet filters, are like coffee filters. You want the grit taken out, but the flavour to remain.
  • Filters "protect" our children only so far. Parents need to be taught practical tips for raising Internet safe kids. I think teacher librarians can play a vital role in educating parents about the risks of on-line interactions (it takes a global village...)
  • Acceptable Use Policies are like field trip forms saying you give permission for your child to be taken out into the world for educational purposes - but a signed piece of paper doesn't ensure that your child won't sprain an ankle in the real world, or come across questionable content in the virtual one.
  • Acceptable Use Policies need to be written in an accessible manner. I wonder what would happen if students were asked to write them? We need to make sure that teachers, parents, and children understand what they are signing, so it doesn't just become another piece of paper.
  • There are a lot of gatekeepers doing what's supposedly best for kids. . . .but I have to question: is someone getting rich off of this? Have we been manipulated to believe our kids are in danger on the Net? Have school boards been manipulated by filter software companies to believe filters will protect them from irate parents ready to sue them for exposing their child to the evils of the net? Where are these irate parents?
  • Why bother to invest in new technology if all we're really comfortable with is word processing? Why not bring back the typewriter?
  • The safety issue shouldn't be about exposure - but lack of experience in dealing with exposure.

Final Thoughts, and One Anecdote - Trust in the Force

I truly believe students can rise to the occassion of social responsibility as they grow and learn with Web 2.0 technologies. Reactionary blocking based on fear of the darker side of the web must be questioned. I recently observed a Facebook group directing hatred towards a student by other students. It would do little good for educators to swoop in and block access to such a site (after all, educators can't block home computers, and it is unlikely that the group was started within the school walls). What actually happened was that another student from the same town (now away at university) stepped in and said the site was very uncool and wrong. I don't know if the students who started the site were humbled or not, but hopefully they will think twice before doing it again. I think in such a situation we can not act alone as educators - this is a community issue (on-line and off). Parents, teachers, and students themselves need to find their way in this new world. We need moral codes of conduct that transcend the walls of the school, and filters simply can't do that.