May 2008 — Features
Print this article | Email this articleClick here to receive your FREE subscription to T.H.E. Journal
What Are We Protecting Them From?
By mandating schools restrict internet access, CIPA and other federal and state legislation intend to guard students' safety online-but all they may be doing is keeping vital educational technology out of the classroom.
On June 23, 2003, in writing the Supreme Court's
majority opinion that upheld the constitutionality of the
Children's Internet Protection Act (CIPA), the late Chief
Justice William Rehnquist shot down concerns that the
law's mandated internet filters would block users of
public library computers from visiting unobjectionable
websites. "Any such concerns are dispelled
by the ease with which patrons may
have the filtering software disabled," Rehnquist
wrote. "When a patron encounters
a blocked site, he need only ask a
librarian to unblock it."
The ease with which patrons may have the filtering software disabled.
Oh really?
In a debate that has so much to do with the fine lines of meaning and interpretation, this assumption, according to online safety expert Nancy Willard, is what's all wrong with CIPA, which requires any school or library receiving funding from the federal E-Rate program to deploy web filtering technology that prevents users from viewing objectionable material while they are using the institution's computers. Willard, director of the Center for Safe and Responsible Internet Use in Eugene, OR, argues that web filters actually can threaten, not protect, students' security.
"Say there's a report of material that is posted on MySpace that relates to student safety or well-being, and that information is reported to a counselor," she explains, "the counselor needs to immediately get past the filter to review the material. Otherwise you have the potential for violence or suicide. In many schools, the ability to rapidly override the filter has not been established, which is impairing instructional activities as well as jeopardizing student safety."
It's only one of many points of contention Willard and other educators have raised in opposition to CIPA since its enactment in 2000, as well as the various similar pieces of federal and state legislation that have since been introduced in the effort to protect children from online predators and offensive web content while in public schools and libraries. No one disputes the need to protect kids from the harm that lurks online. What's at issue is whether or not mandated internet filters are the best way to achieve those safeguards-or whether the filters aren't up to the task and are actually interfering with the educational mission by obstructing use of important Web 2.0 tools.
