Jodi Cooper Wentz

Censorship and Copyright:

Schools and Internet Filters

Summer 2010

We believe that free communication is essential to the preservation of a free society and a creative culture. ~~American Library Association

There are different kinds of truth for different kinds of people. There are truths appropriate for children; truths that are appropriate for student; truths that are appropriate for educated adults; and truths that are appropriate for highly educated adults, and the notion that there should be one set of truths available for everyone is a modern democratic fallacy. It doesn’t work. ~~Irving Kristol

Internet Filters: Remodeling a Permanent School Fixture

School librarians, with other educators, are vibrating with the tension between what is ethical and what is developmentally appropriate for school-age students. These are highly subjective, individualistic notions; regardless of studies and statutes, the interpretation of ethics and appropriateness will inevitably result in personal manifestations of prejudice.

Meanwhile, rhetoric is polemic. I have an innate tendency to walk quietly down the proverbial middle-of-the road, avoiding the polarizing extremes. I have never been alone there. I have always had plenty of company and felt in the majority. However, there comes a time when if you do not get out of the middle of the road, you will get run over.

The issue of Internet filtering in schools requires the school librarian to take a stance. The issues of ethics and developmental appropriateness collide in this matter. If the librarian is not a strong voice of reason, both freedom of information and a child’s well-being will collide and destroy both. As a high school librarian in the public schools, I acquiesce the permanent presence of Internet filters in American education, but I do not abdicate advocacy for the both the protection and freedom of the student.

Coalescing of Circumstances

In the last decade in America, there has been a coalescing of circumstances that has irrevocably placed Internet filters as a permanent fixture in American schools. First, the concept of parentis in loco has been extended. Initially, this idea of schools as the proxy parent meant that schools provided a physically safe environment for students. Now, this has extended to include the safeguarding of a child’s emotional and psychological well-being. Combined with the technologies of the World Wide Web and its ubiquitous pornography and obscenity, the federal government enacted the Child Internet Protection Act (CIPA) in 2001. This act gave schools and public libraries financial incentive to enforce safety policies and protective measures on Internet use in the school. Schools were told to block obscene and harmful materials. While the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), the American Library Association (ALA), and its organization the American Association of School Librarians (AASL), were quick to come to the defense of the public libraries, their support of schools was more talk than action (Schools and CIPA).

Added to this mixing of circumstances, there are community expectations and concerns that students not be exposed to inappropriate materials on the Internet. Schools operate to meet the community expectations. In my own experience, this is exemplified. I am public high school librarian in a suburban community in the heartland of Ohio. It is historically conservative. The filters on the school’s computers are run by a separate technology administration. I have no access to the filter, and it routinely overblocks materials. Outside of InfOhio databases, there is no access to pictures or social networking. I have heard the superintendent express clearly that he will never have a parent come to his office because a child has seen pornography on the school computers. The national and local climate has coalesced to make Internet filters a permanent fixture in the American schools.

Responsibilities

Despite the circumstances, there are professional responsibilities and obligations that cannot be dismissed. The American Library Association advocates free communication, free society, and a creative culture (ALA). The Library Bill of Rights explicitly prescribes the free access of materials to all people (ALA Bill of Rights). The integrity of the profession is at risk if these values are compromised.

The local school board and school library provide mission statements about the library’s aim to help students meet learning standards. In the school district where I work, there is a policy on challenged materials that recommends a collection of materials that is broad and fair-minded regarding controversial issues.

The No Child Left Behind Act places emphasis on literacy, and this has ramifications on the school library as well. Dr. Rubin emphasizes this connection: “If school library media specialists can demonstrate that they help meet their state curricular standards, they can become substantial beneficiaries of the act (p 354). In Ohio, there are academic content standards for the library (ODE-Library).

Furthermore, CIPA standards must be met within the school. The library is often a hub of technology, and the librarian has responsibilities to meet these policy requirements. From education of cyber issues to Internet filtering, there are government regulations.

Realities

Sometimes the responsibilities are not conducive to the reality of the situation. These realities must be acknowledged in order to formulate effective strategies that will meet the professional responsibilities of a school librarian.

In reality, librarians have little say regarding the school’s Internet filter. According to the June 2003 Who’s Blocking Whom? in the School Library Journal (SLJ), Walter Minkel states that decisions regarding filtering, which should be made by the schools, are instead relegated to private companies where, “…all information about the criteria, keywords, decision-making processes, and the list of blocked sites is confidential (p 35). Where I am employed, I have no physical access to the filter. I cannot unblock sites or override the filter. There is no appeal process to get sites unblocked. The technology administrator has explained to me that to unblock one site will override the whole filtering system. The district’s restrictive policies and the autonomous decisions of the filtering companies make for a difficult reality.

In reality, overblocking happens. Overblocking is what happens when filters inevitably block sites that contain material that is constitutionally protected. Moreover, the filters block educationally appropriate materials. The SLJ article by Minkel also cites the 2002 Henry J. Kaiser Foundation study stating that Internet filters that block 91% of pornographic Web sites also block 24% of the sites that provide helpful health information (p 35). In another SLJ article from December 2005, Filters Impede Learning, Michigan librarian Lynn Sutton tracked several high school English classes. Students were forced to do research from home computers to get access to needed information, and librarian’s felt powerless to change the situation (p 24). The Electronic Frontier Foundation did a study of Internet filters and concluded in a 2003 press release: “After testing nearly a million web pages related to state-mandated curriculums, the researchers found that of the web pages blocked, 97-99% of a significant sample were blocked using non-standard, discretionary, and potentially illegal criteria beyond what CIPA requires” (EFF: Study Released). In my library, students do not have access to any images. It is a text-only environment, which clearly impedes learning.

In reality, librarians fear for their jobs. Creating political waves can place fear and trepidation in the most tenured, courageous librarian. Today’s economic climate is distressing enough. The librarian who makes himself or herself contentious fears budget cuts and job loss. I have had my position as a high school librarian for one year. The district is facing an emergency operating levy this fall, with vocal threats of staff cuts if it fails. Many local districts run the school library with low-paying aids. My position is tenuous, and becoming litigious or controversial is not desirable.

In reality, librarians want to protect children and not harm them. I care about children. I put helmets on children when they ride their bikes. I use the mandated car-safety seats. I have been immersed in the notion of developmental appropriate materials when addressing the educational needs of students. I do not want children to be exposed to material that is inappropriate and perhaps harmful.

Librarians operate in a reality that is often not conducive to their responsibilities. It is reasonable to predict that the Internet filter is a permanent fixture for the school library media center; however, this does not condone abdication of professional duties. Instead, it calls for creative remodeling and active involvement.

The Librarian Remodels

The librarian has tools and power. It is possible to utilize available tools that will support professional responsibilities, work within the reality of the school library culture, protect children, increase information access, and affect positive change. The following suggestions are gleaned from common sense, personal experience, and an article by Mary Anne Belle in the January 2007 SLJ entitled The Elephant in the Room.

· Find a seat at the table. School librarians should have a voice in technology policies and concerns. It is reasonable to ask an administrator for a place on the committee. I have asked to be a part of curriculum committees, textbook committees, and technology committees. The administration has honored these requests as a natural extension of the librarian’s role in educating students.

· Know the standards. InfOhio has made available the Ohio academic content standards for all disciplines. In order to advocate for student access, librarians should know the standards. Being able to present how and where the filter impedes learning standards is powerful.

· Record anecdotal evidence. Keep records of student searches that are not fruitful and be able to present them.

· Use minimal filters and high levels of policy. CIPA dictates policy and blocking, but it does not express the extent of these. Librarians have the opportunity shape policy and implement stringent policies about appropriate use. They are also afforded the opportunity to provide quality information about the dangers of certain Internet issues. Meanwhile, CIPA does not state the extent of filtering, so librarians can be vocal for minimal filtering.

· Lobby for filter access. Librarians are in the trenches with students. They should be able to quickly disable filters. Furthermore, librarians can help establish a simple, efficient process for changing incorrect or unnecessary settings on the filter.

· Consider your constituents. CIPA only applies to those under seventeen. This means that the majority of juniors and seniors are not covered by CIPA regulations. Librarians can and should make use of this information.

· Staff development meetings. Librarians can lead the staff in these issues. Teachers are also frustrated by impeding filters. Ask their opinions and lobby on their behalf.

Internet filters have become a permanent fixture in American schools. While they strive to protect school-age children, they can also impede learning. Librarians are called to stand in the gap, protecting freedom and standards of appropriateness. Rather than acquiesce in this difficult situation, librarians can exercise their power to advocate and educate. The twenty-first century has ushered unprecedented changes in the use of technology, and library professionals can influence policy and practice in this brave new world.