Chapter 10: Responsible Use of Technology

This chapter presents three topics related to the responsible use of technology:

• equity
• copyright law
• protection of students from inappropriate content and experiences

Use the following questions to guide your study:

• What inequities exist in student access to technology and in the learning activities students experience? What factors appear responsible for these inequities?
• What adaptations can be implemented for students with special needs?
• What is copyright law designed to protect? What are key guidelines that determine what can be taken from the Internet and what can be placed on the Internet?
• What are some safety guidelines that all Internet users should know?
• What are some options students might use to protect students from inappropriate content?

I. Equity of Educational Opportunity (pp. 365-378)

Students who move through the educational system without having access are likely to be limited in their content area learning experiences and to miss out on the development of skills preparing them to use technology in future work settings.

A number of descriptive students have attempted to identify inequities in technology access. Descriptive studies indicate when differences exist, but do not explain the cause of these differences. The variables studied include:

• student to computer ratio
• classroom Internet access
• the frequency of specific categories of computer use
• support provided teachers

I.A Socioeconomic Status (SES)

SES is an indicator based on income, education, and occupation of parents. In many studies, schools are classified based on the proportion of students coming from homes with limited resources. The variable used in many descriptive studies is the proportion of students eligible for subsidized school lunches. For example, some of the data reported in Chapter 11 were obtained from schools in which more than 70% of students receive free or reduced cost lunch.

Additional information about e-rate

Indicators (citations provided in book):

• Access to computers - differences associated with SES have narrowed significantly because of government programs.
• Internet access - The ratio of students to an Internet-connected computer was 4.1:1 nationwide and 4.3:1 in the least affluent category (note statistics such as this are changing rapidly).
• Availability of a computer coordinator - Using the same category system, 39% of the most affluent schools and 19% of the least affluent schools had a full-time computer coordinator.
• Teachers in high poverty schools report greater use of technology than teachers in low poverty schools. Teachers report greater use of computers for drill activities (U.S. Department of Education, 2003).

Data on school resources do not provide the full picture. Students also develop skills and do work at home. Here the SES differences are significant and increasing.

Home Access Issues

I.B The ETS Math Study

The ETS Math Study (1998) was unusual because it evaluated technology activity using data gathered from a major standardized test.

The data included:

• frequency with which technology was used in the study of mathematics
• student access to technology
• professional development of teachers
• categorization of how technology was applied to study of math
• social environment of the school

Some findings:

• 8th graders scored higher when technology was used to provide content area applications and simulations. Students scored lower when technology emphasized drill and practice.
• Students in schools with higher proportion of low SES students more likely to use technology for drill and practice.
• Teachers in schools with higher proportion of low SES students received fewer professional development activities.
• Amount of professional development related to whether or not teachers emphasized drill and practice.

One, but not the only, possible causal model based on these relationships argues that teachers in less affluent schools receive less support, because of this lack of support they are more likely to emphasize the use of technology for drill, and because drill is emphasized students perform at a lower level.

Another possible explanation based on other research, suggests teachers working with students from less affluent homes assume these students require a greater emphasis on "basics" and as a consequence emphasize drill and practice. A more recent issue is the pressure to raise scores on standardized tests and this pressure has influenced how educators in low-SES schools feel students should spent time using technology (Warschauer, Knobel & Stone, 2004).

I.C Gender equity

Gender differences have been identified (see citations in book):

• Male and female students enroll in courses that emphasize different uses of technology.
• Very few high school females take the computer science advanced placement test.
• About 25% of undergrad computer science degrees are awarded to females.
• Females rate themselves as having poorer computer skills.

Possible explanations include:

• Stereotypes of computer users perpetuated by the media.
• Recreational software more strongly slanted toward male users.
• Association of technology with other content areas (math, science) that also seem to attract fewer females.
• More aggressive nature of males provides an advantage in competing for limited resources.
• Heavy game use focuses participants on competition, speed, and eye-hand coordination and some have suggested such priorities are anxiety-provoking in females.

I.D Ability Issues

Students of different ability end up using technology in different ways. Educators must consider their decision-making process in engaging students with technology. With less-able students, do such decisions focus on remediation and limit the scope of technology-based students experience.

I.E Adapting technology

More than 50 million Americans have some disability that would benefit from adaptive technology.

I.E.1 Adapting to mobility impairments

• adaptations to keyboards
• alternative ways to control the cursor

I.E.2 Adapting to visual impairments

• screen reader software "reading text" and describing menus, windows, etc.
• software to magnify screen image

I.E.3 Adaptive web page design

Web pages must be carefully designed to provide full access. The most based rule is to convey all information using text. For example, images allow the inclusion of an "alt" attribute in HTML. The text associated with this alt attribute can be read by a screen reader. Images used as links (e.g., image maps) can be supplemented by alternative text links.

Issues in web page design

More comments on equity issues

II. Copyright Law and Respect for Intellectual Property (pp. 378-390)

Teachers must be aware of their personal obligations regarding copyrighted materials and also teach their students to respect the intellectual property of others. Copyright is an important issue in education because the process of education relies heavily on instructional materials (including the Internet) and because teaching responsible behavior is part of the educational mission.

II.A Copyright law

Copyright law is intended to encourage "the progress of science and useful arts." Taking the long view, it is intended to encourage progress which results in a collective benefit to society.

II.A.1 Copying software

Illegal copying of software, often called software piracy, is estimated to cost software authors and the companies who support them over $3 billion annually.

II.A.2 Fair use

There are some situations in which limited copying of content is allowed. "Fair Use" allows some duplication for purposes of teaching, learning, and research. While the principles and guidelines are easy enough to explain, there is always an element of judgment in applying fair use in specific situations. Most authors are cautious in their recommendations and suggest that the user ask permission when a practice being considered is questionable.

Certain guidelines are to be considered when determining whether copying represents fair use:

• purpose of the use - e.g., nonprofit educational vs. commercial
• nature of the work - e.g., factual vs. created
• amount - e.g., small section vs. entire work
• impact on commercial value - e.g., part of a journal vs. part of a workbook

Fair use guidelines vary with the medium and have been more clearly articulated in some areas than others. Copying commercial television broadcasts for classroom use is one area in which there are clear guidelines.

II.A.1.a Fair Use and the Internet

Multimedia and web page authoring - two topics emphasized in this book - are examples of areas in which guidelines are less clearly articulated. In order to help teachers consider topics related to multimedia, we have attempted to generate several key questions:

• Can students and teachers take resources from web sites for use in learning and instructional activities?
• Can students and teachers use material developed by others on their own web pages?
• Can teachers post student work on the web?

A key point for educators to note is that the guidelines that determine what is allowed for personal use are not the same as the guidelines that determine what resources a teacher can offer to students. A common example familiar to college instructors is that they can copy a journal article for personal use, but they cannot then make copies of that same article and distribute it in class.

The Conference on Fair Use (actually several meetings) generated some guidelines for multimedia. The following information is intended to provide some examples of these suggestions and is not complete.

Application:

• Students may create and present multimedia projects containing copyrighted material for educational purposes and may save these projects as examples of their knowledge and skills.
• Teachers may use multimedia containing copyrighted material conforming to fair use expectations in direct instruction, student self-study, and as an example of professional skill.

Time and Distribution:

• Teacher-created multimedia can be used for instruction for two years if copying of that material is not allowed.

Portion of original:

• Video - up to 10% or 3 minutes (whichever is less)
• Text - up to 10% or 1000 words of prose (whichever is less)
• Music - up to 10% or 30 seconds (whichever is less)
• Images - no more than 5 from an artist or 10 from a collection

Application of guidelines to questions:

• Students and teachers can create multimedia products as long as they conform to the CONFU guidelines.
• Internet presentation does not limit access so Fair Use guidelines DO NOT apply. (new guidelines for distance education may evolve but Fair Use should not be assumed at present).
• The TEACH Act (2002) was intended to provide distance educators the same instructional opportunities accorded to classroom instructors. The TEACH Act offers instructors new opportunities when functioning in "presentation" mode. If the system is "protected", Fair Use opportunities apply. Guidance for what students can do online and what resources can be placed online for an extended period of time are really not addressed. In such situations, the CONFU guidelines are more helpful.
• Students have rights as authors and presentation of their work must be treated in the same way as the work of any author.

More information on TEACH Act

Creative Commons

Some authors of digital content are willing to make the material they create available for others to use under carefully designated circumstances. A Creative Commons license is a way to specify the circumstances under which content may be used by others and content offered in this way represents an opportunity for teachers and students (learn more).

Who Owns the Copyright to Student Work?

Copyright law is clear on the issue of ownership. Unless a student has been hired to create material and is operating under a formalized work-for-hire agreement, a student owns any work he or she has created. Does this mean that the teacher cannot keep or make copies of this work? In one opinion (Burke, 1993), it was argued that a teacher might have an implicit license to make copies to be used as an example for later classes. For example, teachers sometimes save outstanding research papers so that students in later classes can see what teachers expect. However, the instructor would not have the right to use student material in a derivative work-something like a book authored by the teacher in which the student work appears as an example. The best policy is to treat student work in the same way you would treat the work of any artist or author; that is, request signed permission to use the work. (Note that, because K?12 students are minors, certain situations may also require permission from a parent or legal guardian.) Recognizing student work in this manner helps the student understand the concept of authorship and develops an appreciation for the rights accorded those producing intellectual and creative works.

Burke, E. (1993). Copyright catechism. Educom Review, 28(5), 46-49.

III. Protecting Students from Inappropriate Content and Experiences (pp 390-398)

The Internet does not exist specifically to serve educational goals and as a consequence students may encounter content not appropriate in an educational setting.

The risks include:

• Inappropriate content - sexually oriented material, violence, content promoting hatred.
• Physical molestation - communication tools can be used to gain the trust of individuals who are later molested.
• Harassment - demeaning or threatening messages are sent to an individual.
• Financial threats - deceptions resulting in students providing credit card numbers.

There is a need to balance freedom and protection. The challenge is to create an Internet environment that does not impose censorship and yet allows adults to control what minors in their care experience.

Educators can:

• direct students toward safe areas of the Internet
• use filtering systems that screen Internet content
• intervene directly through supervision and instruction

Data from the Center for Missing and Exploited Children

III.A Safe areas of the Internet

Educatonal portals and search sites designed for students offer protection from inappropriate content and experiences.

III.B Filtering

The content which can be accessed in classrooms can be screened.

III.B.1 Firewall

A firewall is a computer and specialized software that controls the content flowing between one network (the Internet) and another (the school LAN).

III.B.2 Stand-alone filtering software

Software can be loaded that will monitor the Internet content requested. Content originating from disapproved sites can be blocked.

III.B.3 Browser filtering

Browsers have built-in filtering. Web pages can be written so that the HTML contains information about the content of the pages (e.g., PICS ratings). When the browser filtering system is active, pages with HTML codes indicating disapproved content will not be displayed. This system requires that content providers include ratings and the screening feature of the browser has been activated.

A difficult challenge exists in deciding how to configure the screening settings. The browser can be configured to reject pages with ratings that indicate content the school does not feel is appropriate and with no ratings at all. While this combination would provide a reasonable level of protection, blocking pages without ratings would exclude a great deal of useful web content.

Comment: Is filtering the answer?

OpenDNS - a free online filter

III.C Instruction

Instruction includes teaching safety rules, developing an acceptable-use policy, and direct supervision use of technology.

Safety guidelines - students can be informed what they should reveal when using e-mail or chat or when filling out web forms.

Acceptable Use Policies (AUP) - An AUP established expectations for how students (and faculty) will use school resources, procedures they are expected to follow, and consequences when these procedures are violated.

Supervision - School personnel (teachers, librarians, other staff members) must be willing to monitor student use of computers and the Internet.