Blog

If you look at any “Top Ten List of Ways to Keep Your Kids Safe Online” that you find on the Internet, no doubt one of the recommendations that you will find near the top is: “Keep the family computer in a common area of the house.”  While this is sage advice, it is also overly simplistic.  First of all, everyone has a friend who has a computer in their bedroom.  In fact, 56% of youth in our most recent survey reported that they had a computer that was connected to the Internet in their bedroom at home.  So your child will simply go to someone else’s house to surf in privacy.  Second, they can often access the Internet at school or at the local library.  You might think that filters will prevent your child from accessing inappropriate content, but think again.  Ask your typical teen and they can talk you through ways around filters.  And while teachers and librarians try to monitor computer usage, it can be difficult to continuously watch.  Finally, if your child has a web-enabled cell phone, they have a computer in their pocket – no need for a big clunky machine in their bedroom.  Nearly 50% of the students in our most recent survey said they could access the Internet from their cell phone.

I tend to take a slightly different view of this particular problem than most.  Without a doubt, parents need to monitor what their kids are doing online.  But instead of completely prohibiting access at home or in one’s bedroom, consider being more creative.  For example, maybe you allow your teen to have the family laptop in their rooms for one hour each night for approved purposes only (e.g., homework).  You tell your daughter that you have installed tracking software and that you will review everything that she has done on the computer on a regular basis and if she violates the agreed-upon rules, the technology will be taken away.  On the other hand, if she demonstrates responsibility over a period of time, then additional privileges will gradually be granted.  For example, maybe at some point you allow your child to go onto Facebook for up to an hour per day (after homework and housework is done!).  Another condition of Facebook usage might be that they help you (the parent) set up your own profile and then they must be your friend.  That way you can see everything that your child is doing on the site and ask them about unwise postings or unfamiliar people.  Doing this at a relatively early age (13 or 14) will help to instill responsible practices at an age when they will still listen to you.  If you wait until they are older (16 or 17), you will likely miss the boat and they may have already established questionable practices.

In short, I would like to suggest that parents be creative about encouraging responsible technology usage.  Don’t assume that your child will have the knowledge necessary to make good decisions while online.  We take a long time to teach our kids how to drive a car, and eventually we have to let them drive alone.  We only do this after many many hours of practice and instruction.  Some will get into accidents or receive speeding tickets.  Many will not.  The same is true with technology. If given instruction and guidance, I am confident that most teens will avoid the pitfalls associated with technology.  Ultimately, parents themselves are the best judge of their child’s ability to be responsible, and frankly some kids will not respond well to the added responsibility and privilege.  Parents know when to sign their child up for driver’s education classes, when to have them get behind the wheel for the first time, and when to turn them loose on their own (after getting their license or course).  Parents also have a responsibility to ride shotgun with their kids on the information superhighway.  Putting the time in early will pay dividends over the long haul.

Our colleague Anne Collier from NetFamilyNews made us aware of an email that Anthony Orsini, a middle school principal from New Jersey, sent to parents a couple of weeks ago imploring them to prohibit their children from participating in social networking sites. As reported on CBS and elsewhere, the letter Orsini sent to parents included the following text:

“Please do the following: sit down with your child (and they are just children still) and tell them that they are not allowed to be a member of any social networking site. Today! … There is absolutely no reason for any middle school student to be a part of a social networking site! Let me repeat that – there is absolutely, positively no reason for any middle school student to be a part of a social networking site! None.”

Sameer and I have been exploring adolescent social networking for almost 5 years and even though we see the worst of the worst in terms of behaviors, we also agree that such examples represent the exception, not the rule.   In general, we believe the benefits of social networking outweigh the negatives and potential risks, if youth learn to use the sites responsibly. It is certainly a very good idea for parents to talk to their kids about what they are doing online, though simply banning access to technology, without just cause, is a big mistake. For one thing, it is literally impossible for parents to completely prevent their children from participating in social networking. If they really want to be on social networking sites, they will find a way to get on: they will go to a friend’s house or log on at the library or pursue underground social networking sites that are less well known or regulated.

It is a much better strategy for parents to carefully express their concerns about these environments and teach youth how to be responsible online. Tell them that it isn’t a good idea to accept as friends those who they do not know and trust in real life. Demonstrate the dangers of posting too much personal information online. Show them how to use the privacy settings. Provide them with examples from the media where teens have gotten into trouble for misusing social networks. Our research suggests that teens are listening and improving social networking practices! Print this out and give it to them. Odds are they will be just fine if they abide by these commonsense guidelines.

Then, have your kids help you set up a Facebook page and tell them that they need to be your friend. That way you can see everything they are doing on the site and you can remind them about what you talked about if they slip up. And you can send them gifts on Farmville.

It is very important that parents and others work to instill responsible practices in youth at a relatively early age – when they will still listen. Banning access is a short-term solution that will likely create additional problems in the future when teens eventually do go online and don’t have the skills necessary to responsibly navigate the World Wide Web.

By the way, as Anne points out on her blog, the same week that the New Jersey principal distributed the email encouraging parents to ban participation in Facebook, the Boston Globe reported that Obama’s pick for Teacher of the Year regularly uses Facebook in her classes. As you know, we have discussed the issue of teachers interacting with teens online in multiple posts on this blog. While I am not sure that we have come to any definitive conclusion, it is interesting to see examples from both sides of the issue come up in the news recently. What do you think: prohibit or promote the use of online social networking?

Justin and I were chatting recently about an example cyberbullying case that involves a student who repeatedly is posting comments on her Facebook page about a teacher at school, stating “Mr. Z is a douchebag,” “Mr. Z is a jerk and nobody likes him,” and “Please post ‘I Hate Mr. Z’ comments on my wall!”  Assuming that the student speech is protected because it is not materially disrupting school activities, we were wondering what the ramifications would be if Mr. Z posted his feelings and opinions about specific students on his own personal Facebook page.  Should we hold students and teachers to different standards?  Do we?  What are the long-term consequences of doing so?  Before we share our own perspective, we’d love to hear the thoughts of visitors to this blog!

Let’s return to our multi-post (here, here, and here) discussion of student and teacher interaction on social networking sites or in other online venues. Social networks such as Facebook and MySpace are primarily for socializing. “Socializing” involves interacting for social purposes, and “social purposes” are those marked by friendly companionship with others. It seems, therefore, that school staff should avoid socializing with students in these environments, because educators and students arguably should not be engaged in friendly companionship.

There are some significant concerns with the possibility of students and teachers having this kind of interaction, including the issue that students flirt. If a student were to send a flirtatious message to a staff member, that staff member may be in serious trouble. If the teacher responds to the message warmly, he or she faces the accusation of sexual solicitation. If the teacher turns the student down, he or she faces the possibility of revenge.

Another concern is that the staff member participating on a social networking site will become a “guarantor” of all friends, meaning that if a teacher “friends” some students but not others, it could create a perception that those specific students are favored and may receive preferential treatment (such as a better grade than the others). Relatedly, anything performed online by a public school employee – including information and images posted on social networking sites – will be used to judge the character of that individual. There is also the concern that the friends of the staff member may post unflattering information or tag inappropriate images of them which will quickly be used to prompt one major question: “Is this the kind of person we trust to be responsible for our children?”

Ian Defeo, a substitute teacher in Cape May, New Jersey was judged by online content after giving one of his students a sticker with his band’s logo which also had the address to his MySpace page. The student then visited the teacher’s MySpace page which contained his band’s music videos containing explicit lyrics and one video that contained a brief moment where a woman was exposing herself. The school deemed this content inappropriate and therefore fired him, confirming that school employees can be disciplined for off-duty conduct if the school district can show that the conduct may have had an adverse impact on the school. Non-tenured teachers, like Ian, have even fewer protections.

All of this said, I believe school staff should be able to communicate with students regarding class work and school activities through a school-based Web 2.0 environment and district email system (sometimes also termed a “walled garden” approach). These are school-related communications in which distinctions of status are professional maintained and not socially blurred or distorted. Most communication through school-based means are monitored (for example, all communications are CC’d to an administrator or stored in an accessible database for review and archival) and provide a safer means of interaction between teachers and students. My hope is that more and more of these approaches will be implemented and, more importantly, gain visibility, traction, and usage among teachers and youth.

Referring back to the article in Education Week that I wrote about in my earlier post, Terri Miller, the president of the group Stop Educator Sexual Abuse, Misconduct, and Exploitation, says “policy makers should not enact reactionary legislation regarding contact between teachers and students. What they really need to focus on is training in proper boundaries.” Overall, the message to school staff members should be: Think before you act/post. Never send or post, or allow others to send or post any material online that will raise questions about your character or values. Another wise practice that seems critical to implement is to always communicate with students in a professional manner, even if you are using privacy protection features on social networking sites (as privacy protections will not necessarily prevent disclosure of the existence and content of these interactions).

Always exercise extreme care when communicating online with students and if at all possible, avoid socializing. These measures, along with district policy that preempts the possibility of inappropriate relationships developing online between staff and students, seems the best way to go.

Sameer and I have talked a lot about this issue in recent months, and while we both basically agree that teacher-student interactions online are risky business, we struggle with how to best approach the issue.  Earlier today he posted his thoughts on the issue.  I would like to take this opportunity to re-articulate mine to continue the dialog.

As I have argued here before, most will agree that a lot of value could come from teachers interacting online in a professional/educational manner with their students.  Again, assuming teachers and students both establish and maintain appropriate boundaries, these interactions could be very positive.  The most serious risk would be if teachers failed to preserve proper limits or if students misperceived the online attention as something more than educational.  In his earlier post, Sameer points out several terrible examples of these – though we all agree these are extremely rare.  Of course these potential concerns are also present in off-line communications between teachers and students that occur as well (both in school and outside of it).

To be sure, teachers should refrain from friending students on social networking profiles they use for personal purposes.  Clearly separating their work and personal lives is important.  Moreover, teachers have an obligation to intervene if they see inappropriate content or evidence of a violation of school policy (or the law) on a student’s profile.  That is a cost of engaging in online communications.

Instead of prohibiting good teachers from utilizing all available tools to educate their students and promote their healthy development, focus should be placed on informing both students and staff about these concerns and fire or discipline teachers who engage in inappropriate behaviors, no matter where the occur.  Sameer theorizes that online interactions make it easier for inappropriate relationships to develop between students and staff.  That may be true, but we shouldn’t hold that against the vast majority of great teachers who will do the right thing.

Schools probably should have a clear policy that establishes the professional standard in online student-teacher interactions.  But they shouldn’t outright prohibit it.  That said, many teachers may feel, for whatever reason, that interacting with students online just isn’t for them.  Either way, it should be their choice.  But they need to be made aware of the issues so that they can make an informed decision.

Sameer and I agree that this issue is complicated and demanding of public discourse.  You have our thoughts, what do you think? Here’s another poll!