Internet filters are “software programs designed to block access to offensive sites. This is done by matching a user’s preference to a list of sites previously rated by a third party or by checking for certain alphanumeric string (example; breast) to identify an objectionable incoming content and block it before it appears on the users screen” Hall, R., & Carter, E. (2006).

Students

Parents

Teachers

Administrators

Some students might intentionally misuse the privilege of internet access.

“Schools should use Web filters because some kids might go to sites that they shouldn't go to. I think Web filters keep kids away from the nonschool stuff on the Web. They help us look up stuff for school projects, and keep us away from bad things.” (Danielle Curtician, 10, Pennsylvania, 2001)

Inappropriate information is very easily accessed on the internet.

“If people under 17 are not allowed into R-rated films alone, they should be prevented from viewing even less appropriate material online. It is true that some sites might be blocked accidentally, but it is worth making that compromise since sexual or violent material is so easily found on the Internet.” (1999)

Keeps bullying under control and out of the school jurisdiction by blocking blogs, chats, and social networking.

It keeps teachers from bringing up unacceptable websites in class by mistake.

Blocks teachers from accessing email accounts outside of the schools email.

• Prevents the internet from serving as efficient access for students

“Filtering is anti-educational in its explicit manifestation because it prevents students from accessing certain materials that they might find important, interesting, and relevant to their learning” Callister, T., & Burbules, N. (2004).

Software blocks appropriate material such as:◦Blogs/social networking effective for educational

purposes

“Despite the fact that ‘59%..of online students…say they talk about…education-related topics including college or college planning; learning outside of school; news; careers or jobs; politics; ideas, religion or morals and schoolwork,’ research shows that ‘more than half of all districts specifically prohibit any use of social networking sites in school.” (NSBA, 2008)

School districts are spending millions of dollars on software that doesn’t always do its job

Time consuming—many schools don’t have the resources or the money to pay someone to determine what is/what is not appropriate

• Internet Filtering violates students First Amendment rights by not allowing them to view specific information.

ex. The appropriate educational content that students can not access due to filtering

• Filtering sites for kids also filters Internet access for adults when they use the computer. This violates their First Amendment right of Free Speech.

ex. Teachers that are also Graduate Students trying to access their graduate email account in school

Internet filters: 1.Avoid public scrutiny about what should and should not be filtered2.“Decisions are placed in the hands of unknown and unaccountable programmers who develop their own criteria and automated programmers” Callister, T., & Burbules, N. (2004).

• Filtering blocks access to appropriate content that has educational value to the students

3. Filtering software “too often blocks perfectly legitimate sites and often does not block the kinds of sites that it was intended to filter in the first place” Callister, T., & Burbules, N. (2004).

“Most subscription lists accommodate manual overrides to permit the local network administrator to define trusted and questionable domains.” http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2005/tech_suite/app_C.asp

“A larger organization may choose to develop its own process for filtering the Internet… Personnel will need to be assigned to determine which sites should be filtered. The organization will need to establish procedures for monitoring the filter and for responding to requests from staff to modify the filtering protocol.” http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2005/tech_suite/app_C.asp

“Filtering and blocking software helped prevent exposure, but was not 100% effective, the researchers said. In 2000, more than one third of youth internet users (34%) saw sexual material online they did not want to see in the past year compared to one quarter (25%) in 2005”

"To not teach technology use responsibly is neglecting the charge of universal education.” Villano, M. (2008).

There are other ways to keep students safe on the internet. Teachers should familiarize themselves with the social networks that are out on the internet in order to teach their students how to navigate safely.

In Finland the “educators have taught students about responsible internet use for years…most Finnish schools don't even have filters--at least not the kind any technologist would need to worry about” Villano, M. (2008).

“Over there, thanks to solid teaching, the filters are in the students' heads. Students come into school with a sense of responsibility for their learning and a sense of why they're there. Ultimately, that's where we need to be too” Villano, M. (2008).

Appendix C: Web Guidelines, Forum Unified Education Technology Suite." National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) Home Page, a Part of the U.S. Department of Education. Ed. Gerald Malitz, Andy Rogers, and Tom Szuba. Web. 04 Nov. 2010. <http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2005/tech_suite/app_C.asp>.

A Guide for Educators-Filtering-Educational Rights. ACLU (The American Civil Liberties Union). Retrieved from: www.ed.uiuc.edu/wp/censorship/filtering/individual.htm

Baule, S. (2010). Revisiting Filtering. Library Media Connection, 28(5), 48-49. Retrieved from Academic Search Complete database.

Bell, M. (2007). The Elephant In the Room. School Library Journal, 53(1), 40-42. Retrieved from Academic Search Complete database.

Callister, T., & Burbules, N. (2004). Just Give It To Me Straight: A Case Against Filtering The Internet. Phi Delta Kappan, 85(9), 649-655. Retrieved from Academic Search Complete database.

David, N. (1998, March).A Guide for Educators-Filtering-Educational Rights. eSchool News. Retrieved from: www.ed.uiuc.edu/wp/censorship/filtering/individual.htm

Hall, R., & Carter, E. (2006). Examining the Constitutionality of Internet Filtering in Public Schools: A US Perspective. Education and the Law, 18(4), 227-245. Retrieved from ERIC database.

Johnson,D. Censorship by Omission. Library Media Connection, 28(4), 48-49. Retrieved from Academic Search Complete database.

Pascopella, A. (2008). Online Filtering Gets Smarter. District Administration, 44(2), 14. Retrieved from Academic Search Complete database.

McCarthy, D. (2005). Internet Filtering for Schools - An Update. Media & Methods, 41(6), 9-11. Retrieved from Academic Search Complete database.

Meeder, R. (2005). Access Denied: Internet Filtering Software in K-12 Classrooms. TechTrends: Linking Research & Practice to Improve Learning, 49(6), 56-78. Retrieved from Academic Search Complete database.

Schmidt, C. (2008). Those Interfering Filter! How to Deal with the Reality of Filters in Your School Library. Library Media Connection, 26(6), 54-55. Retrieved from Academic Search Complete database

Debate. (2001). In Scholastic News (Vol. 63 Issue 18, p7, 2/5p). New York City, New York: Scholastic Inc.

Should public Libraries Filter the Internet? (1999). In Scholastic Scope (Vol. 48, p. 4). New York City, New York: Scholastic Inc.

Trevor Hall, R., & Carter, E. (2006). Examining the constitutionality of Internet filtering in public schools: a US perspective. Education & the Law, 18(4), 227-245.

Villano, M. (2008). What Are We Protecting Them From?. T.H.E. Journal, 35(5), 48-54. Retrieved from ERIC database.