[features]
march–april 1999 • vol 3. no.
2
The Internet and civic
education , by John Elfrank-Dana
|
|
the communications revolution has extended to
the classroom
|
|
the communications revolution has
extended to the classroom. Professional organizations have been
abuzz with conference after conference, web site after web site,
seminar after seminar to shape and guide the use of the Internet in
instruction. Teachers are becoming more eager to figure out how to
harness this new technology in their instruction to make their
classes more enriching and their lives a little easier. However, are
we using the Internet for its unique advantages in delivering
education, or are we just adding to the instructional repertoire the
same old methods of teaching? Are we, as social studies teachers,
better instilling democratic values in our students as is our
charge, or are we continuing the culture of conformity and obedience
that "schooling" tends to promote?
The communicative aspects of the Internet make it a revolutionary
or transformative tool that social studies teachers could harness.
However, this implies a different approach to education in the
classroom and a different role for the teacher and student—a role
many may find disconcerting. I have been using the Internet in my
social studies classes since 1991. My practice has evolved from
downloading material from gopher sites and the web to distribute in
class to working with my class in a computer lab. I have noticed in
my own practice and the practice of others two distinct ways to
approach the Internet in instruction. One is to view it as a giant
textbook from which to take selected materials and add to the
existing repository of instructional materials. The other approach
is to view the Internet as a revolutionary communications tool that
creates new frontiers of exploration for students and teachers. I
have used a combination of the two approaches. However, there is a
pervasive mentality among institutions and instructors that call for
us to reign in the Internet so it can be "safe" for high school
students to use.
"Safety" can mean a couple of things in this context: 1) personal
safety or preventing the school district from being sued for some
student getting into trouble from unfiltered exposure to the
Internet; or 2) intellectual safety, i.e., exposure to "bad ideas"
put out by private individuals or "kooks" who are not qualified or
lack institutional credentials to write on a given topic. Filters or
prescribed viewing lists emerge as the remedy to avoid such
problems. Boards of education and universities often resort to these
tactics for both well meaning and self-serving reasons.
The New York City Board of Education, for whom I work, is a good
example of an institution trying to make the Internet "safe," and
provides a good case study. In its guide for parents and
teachers—"Who's Afraid of the Internet?" —the Board intends to calm
the parents and warn the teachers regarding the use of the Internet
in their schools. No distinction is made between elementary school
and high school: the rules apply at all levels. Among the
prohibitions on teachers and students are:
NO:
Sending or receiving personal messages;
Using the Internet for commercial purposes, advertising, or
similar objectives;
Utilizing copyrighted materials without permission;
Lobbying for political purposes or soliciting votes;
Accessing pornographic or obscene materials;
Sending or receiving messages that are racist, sexist,
inflammatory, hateful, or obscene;
Vandalizing data, software, or equipment;
Sending or receiving another person's messages without
authorization;
Requesting or providing home phone numbers, addresses, or other
personal information without authorization.
There's no clarification of the ambiguities in the nine rules
above; just the stern warning that legal or disciplinary action may
be taken if violation of the above rules occurs.
As a high school social studies teacher, I have several concerns
regarding the above. The rules that concern me most are: 1.) On
personal messages, what is meant by "personal?" Does this mean no
"telementoring" is allowed, where students have e-mail mentors
(usually volunteers from the business world that tutor them)? 2. On
copyrighted materials, does the Board of Education have the
authority to take away our rights to "Fair Use," which the courts
have ruled we are entitled to as educators and students? 3. On
lobbying, does it mean in our Government classes we cannot have
students use the Internet to engage in debate or the election
process? 4. On sending or receiving message that are racist, sexist,
etc., is the Board referring to speech that the courts have
determined as constitutionally protected? How can one control the
messages one receives? Add to this the responsibility to "Continue
to preview sites and materials that students will access on the
Internet," as mentioned in its Guidelines for Educators, and the
teacher has his/her hands tied.
The board has devised a set of rules that try to insulate it from
any possible legal exposure from student use of the Internet. But at
what cost? There's no apparent concern for the professional judgment
of the educator in these rules. As someone charged with instilling
democratic values in students, I am especially troubled because I
feel stripped of the ability to take advantage of the Internet in
any meaningful way in this context. |
|
a realistic and less damaging approach is for
the school to treat the Internet as a field trip
|
|
A realistic and less damaging
approach is for the school to treat the Internet as a field trip. At
our school, students are required to get a permission slip signed
from their parents or guardian before being allowed to use the
Internet. On the permission slip it spells out the rules of usage,
which mentions, among other things, that the computers are only to
be used for class-related activities. The emphasis with this
approach is on classroom supervision. If the students are engaged in
interesting and challenging assignments, they will stray less from
their work to venture off into sites that are not appropriate (the
filter doesn't catch them all anyway). The teacher will be actively
moving around the room, assisting and encouraging students, which
also helps keep the students on task. Computer labs also need to be
designed so that a teacher may see all the computer screens from one
convenient vantage point in the room. It also helps to encourage
teachers with a free period to feel free to avail themselves an
unused workstation, of which there are usually a few each period. I
usually have one or two teachers in the room doing their own
research and helping with supervision. I have had success working
with students that transgress on the rules of usage by simply
withdrawing their rights to use the computer system for a period of
time proportionate to the violation. To add to this scheme the
provisions by the board is overkill. It is a vain attempt to
insulate the class completely from any possible exposure and only
handcuffs the teacher and renders the Internet virtually impotent as
a tool for research and self-expression. |
|
an informed citizenry is essential to
any participatory democracy
|
|
An informed citizenry is
essential to any participatory democracy. One of the revolutionary
aspects of the Internet is its ability to provide instant access to
unprecedented amounts of information. This will have profound
implications for a democratic society. Thousands of new sites appear
every day. Some are better than others. It is important to teach our
students how to manage the growing mass of information available on
the Internet. It is necessary to demonstrate search techniques that
are effective enough to yield consistently the information they need
and critical thinking skills that will help the pupils evaluate that
information. The student becomes aware of differing points of view,
many of which had no means of broad dissemination prior to the
Internet. No longer will the students just be exposed to the opinion
of privileged institutional actors who had access to mainstream or
corporate media; now grassroots organizations can get their message
out to students and the world.
Requiring a teacher to preview sites students may visit is absurd
and makes teaching the management of information impossible.
Students would not be allowed, in effect, to use search engines. Try
previewing all the books and magazines your students may encounter
in the school library on a research assignment. Imagine doing the
same with the Internet! The task is
impossible. |
|
internet filters present another affront to
our democratic sensibilities
|
|
Internet filters present
another affront to our democratic sensibilities. The teacher has
little or no control on how a filter works. A predetermined list of
forbidden sites is developed by strangers at a software company,
usually far away (literally and figuratively) from the community of
the school. These censors limit the instructional materials a
teacher may use. For example, I was planning a lesson on the First
Amendment on one of our school computers that had the approved Board
of Education filter switched on. I was interested in viewing Supreme
Court cases on pornography. Because the word "pornography" was
present in my search query, the filter would not allow any sites to
come up. The same situation would occur when doing research on race
relations or other issues in a social studies class. It is doubtful
that filters will ever be useful for the high school teacher
interested in research in preparation of lessons or the student
doing project exploration. As of this writing, the most flexibility
a filter has to offer is only the option to select or deselect such
broad categories of sites that it's meaningless as a solution.
Teachers that prescribe a site for students to visit would be better
off printing out the material from the site, handing it out in class
and letting someone else use the computer lab. It would make no
significant difference—using the lab would save paper while using
the handouts would save electricity. Surely, the argument could be
made for filters in the elementary and perhaps middle school
settings. However, many high school students will be expected to
have the skills necessary to participate in elections by the end
their senior year. We can better help them with the transition to
the responsibilities of citizenship if teachers are given the
discretion to provide challenging and meaningful use of the unique
advantages of the Internet.
Because of its ubiquitous nature, the use of the Internet as a
teaching tool helps overcome the time and space limitations of
traditional teaching methods. There are no geographical barriers or
time constraints to communication, which allows for profound
transformations in education. Another advantage is that the
classroom is now open for observation and participation by new
actors. Parents can participate in class discussions that take place
in a dedicated online forum; scholars may visit a class discussion
on a topic of their expertise; and students and teachers may
correspond any time from any place. Web pages make it easy for
students and teachers to make their class public for support from
the larger community. Mentors may drop in and lend their advice
regarding a particular student's work or a teacher's planning.
Students may contribute their own work for the world to see and use.
The students rise to the role of potential knowledge creators from
mere spectators of history and literature. The Internet, used to its
fullest advantage, makes all of this
possible. |
|
the new role of the student as content creator
is consistent with pedagogy that fosters responsible citizenship
|
|
This method clashes with the
traditional school culture of control. Many schools today are
fearful of putting student work on the Internet because they have
some kind of reputation (real or imagined) to protect. Their Web
sites serve as brochures or catalogues of school information. The
communication is in one direction, at the viewer with little or no
opportunity to respond. Student work or correspondence is nowhere to
be found. If, however, the students are to publish their work on the
Internet or participate in a discussion online with their fellow
students at school and elsewhere, the activity takes on a new
dimension that only the Internet can provide. They become knowledge
producers, collaborators in the development of knowledge while the
school Web site becomes a hub of intellectual activity.
The new role of the student as content creator is consistent with
pedagogy that fosters responsible citizenship. By "responsible" I
mean the ability to respond appropriately to the challenges a
society provides and as one's conscience dictates. The free society
is comprised of individuals who have the freedom to not only speak
their minds but also act on that freedom. The Internet provides the
opportunity for students to become active players in the culture of
participatory democracy to the extent we give them a voice through
its unprecedented means of
communication. |
|
|
|
Publishing to the world is
another revolutionary aspect of the Internet. No longer do we need
to submit to publishers for their approval to state our opinion to a
broad audience. Any individual with access to a Web site can have
their opinion put on the Web for the world to read and think about.
This can be an empowering experience for the student. For once, they
have a voice beyond the classroom that others may react to. My
students have spent many hours working on their Web pages to perfect
their presentation. Some students have expressed delight and
surprise when they have received e-mail from students at a middle
school seeking help who found their project of the same topic
through a search engine. Although some students spend more time on
adorning their site than on developing social studies content, the
level of work is generally of a higher quality because of the
knowledge that others outside the classroom will be viewing it. This
is a giant leap for freedom of expression—the means to get the
message out provided by the Internet is unprecedented. Teachers of
democracy have an extraordinary opportunity to make use of this
exciting new opportunity in their classes by allowing for student
expression in this context. |
|
|
|
The teacher becomes the
teacher/facilitator in the uncensored online class. His/her job is
to give students the skills to research and make critical judgments
regarding information obtained on the Internet. The teacher
functions as a moderator of online discussions with other students
and teachers and broker for support from outside telementors. This
teacher will be actively moving around the lab to attend to
individual students' needs and will be actively monitoring online
discussions. Gone will be the teacher who stands at the head of the
class and dictates in detail to students the scope and content of
their learning. |
|
the Internet, as with any communications
medium, can be used as a tool of control or freedom
|
|
The Internet, as with any
communications medium, can be used as a tool of control or freedom.
If we are to take our duty of fostering democratic sensibilities in
our students seriously, we must reject the tendency toward
censorship and control by bureaucracies that strip the Internet of
its usefulness to the teaching of the skills for democracy. Students
can become actors in the political process through freely accessing
and evaluating information and producing public content, rather than
being the passive recipients of information provided by a teacher,
institution, or the corporate media. The Internet affords us the
unique opportunity to empower students through its revolutionary
communications abilities. We have the opportunity and therefore the
responsibly to harness this new power for democratic ends. John Elfrank-Dana is a social studies teacher
at Murry Bergtraum High School in New York City. He may be contacted
at http://www.elfrank.com/E-mail.htm
Related Sites:
New York City Board of
Education:
http://www.nycenet.edu/
NYC BOE Internet Usage Policy: http://205.232.145.43/info/internet/default.html
http://www.elfrank.com/
http://mbhs.bergtraum.k12.ny.us/
(school site)
NYC BOE Guidelines for Educators:
http://205.232.145.43/info/internet/guideline.html
| |