ERIC EJ1073945: Filtering beyond CIPA: Consequences of and Alternatives to Overfiltering in Schools

2015·1.1 MB·English

by  ERIC

All materials in this journal subject to copyright by the American Library Association
may be used for the noncommercial purpose of scientific or educational advancement
granted by Sections 107 and 108 of the Copyright Revision Act of 1976. Address
usage requests to the ALA Office of Rights and Permissions.
FFEEAATTUURREE
60 Knowledge Quest | Intellectual Freedom
All materials in this journal subject to copyright by the American Library Association
may be used for the noncommercial purpose of scientific or educational advancement
granted by Sections 107 and 108 of the Copyright Revision Act of 1976. Address
usage requests to the ALA Office of Rights and Permissions.
FILTERING BE YOND
CIPA : CONSEQUENCES
OF AND ALTERNATIVES
TO OVERFILTERING
IN SCHOOL S
Kristen R. Batch
[email protected]
Internet filtering is a routine The American Library Asso- Factors Contributing to the
practice in public schools and ciation’s Office for Information Overimplementation of CIPA
libraries. The Children’s Internet Technology Policy and Office
CIPA requires schools and
Protection Act (CIPA) does for Intellectual Freedom, with
libraries that accept federal funds
not require that all schools and support from Google, Inc.,
or discounts for the provision of
libraries install filters, only those recently conducted a study to
Internet access to use software
that accept certain types of federal investigate, in part, the broader
filters to block access to visual
funds or discounts for the provision impact of CIPA on achieving
images deemed “obscene,” “child
of Internet access. Although educational and social objec-
pornography,” or “harmful to
CIPA grants these institutions tives for the twenty-first century.
minors” (CIPA 2000). Despite
the flexibility to develop filtering Drawing on extensive research,
the narrow mandate of the law
policies appropriate to their interviews, and input from over
and the risk of legal challenges
communities, many institutions thirty experts and practitioners,
for blocking legitimate content,
are filtering well beyond the the study Fencing Out Knowledge:
implementation of CIPA is often
requirements of the law. Schools, in Impacts of the Children’s Internet Protec-
subject to overreaction, myth,
particular, do not limit filtering to tion Act 10 Years Later identified an
and fear. Misperceptions abound
visual images as the law mandates, overreach in the implementa-
that institutions will lose all their
and routinely block access to broad tion of CIPA. This overreach
federal funding if they do not
swaths of information that all users restricts access to information
filter as much as possible, or that
are entitled to view (Chmara 2010). and learning opportunities for
school and library officials will face
Increasingly, schools block access students, and disproportionately
criminal charges for failing to filter
to entire social-media and social- impacts those without a home
Web content to the fullest possible
networking sites and to any websites broadband connection or smart-
extent (Caldwell-Stone 2013).
that are interactive or collaborative, phone. This article summarizes
such as blogs or wikis (AASL the main findings from the report
Technical limitations also
2012). They also rely (mistakenly) and four recommendations for
contribute to overfiltering.
on filtering to deal with issues of actions the ALA should undertake
While filtering software today
hacking, copyright infringement, to help schools and libraries
is more sophisticated than in
and cyberbullying, denying access to align filtering practices with the
the past and offers additional
certain websites and technologies. requirements of the law.
Volume 44, No. 1 | September/October 2015 61
All materials in this journal subject to copyright by the American Library Association
may be used for the noncommercial purpose of scientific or educational advancement
granted by Sections 107 and 108 of the Copyright Revision Act of 1976. Address
usage requests to the ALA Office of Rights and Permissions.
Filtering beyond CIPA’s requirements results in missed
opportunities to prepare students to be responsible users,
consumers, and producers of online content and resources.
control in selecting the content Additionally, as multiple and procuring Internet filters,
to be filtered (Ayre 2004), filters stakeholders are involved in or technology directors also may
are still unable to accurately affected by Internet filtering assume much of the responsibility
identify obscene images. With decisions, perspectives on for implementing filtering policies
the growth of online content filtering frequently differ, (Fuchs 2012). On the other
generated by users, this limitation resulting in wide variations hand, the potential contributions
has made filtering even more in the filtered environments. of school librarians are often
challenging (Deloitte 2008). For example, despite the low overlooked—even though they
On average, software filters number of actual incidents are highly informed in areas of
overblock legitimate content reported by parents and students, student learning, teacher training,
or underblock sexually explicit administrators tend to believe and digital-literacy instruction
content approximately 15 to 20 that negative experiences with (ALA 2013). More than stewards
percent of the time (Houghton- social networking occurred more of print, digital, and technology
Jan 2010). This accuracy rate, frequently than indicated by resources, librarians bring to
however, pertains only to the the reported numbers (NSBA bear a different perspective than
filtering of text content, not visual 2007). The influence of other information technology specialists,
images. More than a decade after stakeholders, such as technology as librarians facilitate the use of
the Supreme Court upheld CIPA, directors, on the implementation resources by students, teachers,
filters still are not able to perform of filters is seldom examined. and the broader public.
the tasks required by the law. In addition to overseeing
62 Knowledge Quest | Intellectual Freedom
All materials in this journal subject to copyright by the American Library Association
may be used for the noncommercial purpose of scientific or educational advancement
granted by Sections 107 and 108 of the Copyright Revision Act of 1976. Address
usage requests to the ALA Office of Rights and Permissions.
I’M BEING REQUIRED TO
INSTALL AN INTERNET FILTER.
WHAT SHOULD I DO?
Trina Magi
[email protected]
Following are steps you can take to blocking criteria as requested by users, and for
unblocking constitutionally protected content
minimize the negative impact of filters.
school-wide. Keep track of instances where
With or without the use of filters, schools filters have interfered with teachers’ ability
and libraries should implement a good to teach and students’ ability to learn so that
you can justify necessary adjustments to the
education and communication program
blocking criteria.
that informs users about effective
searching, identity protection, and 3. Develop a well-crafted policy for
responsible Internet use. Ensure that
managing access to unwanted materials.
guidelines, rules, and procedures are
reasonable, nondiscriminatory, viewpoint-
1. Exercise care in choosing filtering software.
neutral restrictions on Internet access
Urge your district to select software that is
and computer use. Once adopted, all
transparent in its classification system and that
staff and students should be trained in
allows the school to fine-tune the categories
appropriate implementation. The policy
of blocked content. Ensure that people, not
should advise Internet users of their rights
automated algorithms, regularly review and
and responsibilities and should describe
analyze the software’s blocking criteria. Be aware
unacceptable behaviors, the penalties for
that some vendors are affiliated with religious
violations, and how to appeal a decision
organizations or espouse partisan or doctrinal
imposing a penalty.
views. Favor vendors who do not design their
software to advance their own values. Be sure
4. Implement a program to educate students
that the school can switch off or opt out of
about online behavior. The Protecting
viewpoint- or content-based blocking criteria
Children in the 21st Century Act, a statutory
that may run afoul of the First Amendment.
amendment to the Children’s Internet
Especially important is the use of accurate
Protection Act, requires schools that receive
categories for illegal content such as obscenity
E-Rate money to educate students about
or child pornography. Broad categories such as
appropriate online behavior. Your program
“pornography,” which is not defined by law and
should cover interacting with other individuals
is interpreted in many different ways, may sweep
on social-networking websites and in chat
up much constitutionally protected material and
rooms, and cyberbullying awareness and
should be avoided.
response.
2. Exercise care in installing and maintaining
Parts excerpted with permission from “I’m Being Required to
the software. Adjust blacklist criteria to
Install an Internet Filter. What Should I Do?” by Deborah
minimize the blocking of constitutionally
Caldwell-Stone and Sarah Houghton. In Intellectual
protected speech. Establish a clear, transparent,
Freedom Manual, 9th ed., 104–105. (ALA 2015).
and timely process for reviewing and revising
Volume 44, No. 1 | September/October 2015 63
All materials in this journal subject to copyright by the American Library Association
may be used for the noncommercial purpose of scientific or educational advancement
granted by Sections 107 and 108 of the Copyright Revision Act of 1976. Address
usage requests to the ALA Office of Rights and Permissions.
Findings from the ALA study confirm an early concern that CIPA
would create two classes of students: an advantaged class with
unfiltered Internet access at home and a disadvantaged class with
only filtered access at school.
Educational and Social curtailing research and creating digital footprint, leaving students
Consequences of Overfiltering barriers to learning. at a disadvantage when employers
and colleges examine their online
Filtering beyond CIPA’s
By impeding the interactive profiles. Overfiltering also has
requirements results in missed
process of social learning, blocking social consequences for students
opportunities to prepare students
access to interactive websites and because educators cannot help
to be responsible users, consumers,
platforms impacts not only what students navigate ethical choices
and producers of online content
teachers can teach but also how they about online interactions (Gardner
and resources. Some school districts
teach. Restricting access in schools et al. 2011).
block access to content deemed
leaves youth on their own to use
“controversial, inappropriate, or
these sites outside of the classroom Findings from the ALA study
time wasting” (ACLU 2013).
instead of engaging them in the confirm an early concern that CIPA
Others block websites about
use of these tools in a supportive would create two classes of students:
foreign countries, such as China
school environment. Overblocking an advantaged class with unfiltered
and Iran, or biology websites that
in schools limits students’ per- Internet access at home and a dis-
are used in Advanced Placement
spectives on shaping their online advantaged class with only filtered
curricula. Excessive filtering has
presence and understanding the access at school (McCarthy 2004).
the unintended consequence of
extent and permanence of their Moreover, while some students
64 Knowledge Quest | Intellectual Freedom
All materials in this journal subject to copyright by the American Library Association
may be used for the noncommercial purpose of scientific or educational advancement
granted by Sections 107 and 108 of the Copyright Revision Act of 1976. Address
usage requests to the ALA Office of Rights and Permissions.
benefit from responsible-use policies BANNED WEBSITES
with guided instruction and experi-
mentation with digital content and
platforms, others are denied those AWARENESS DAY
educational opportunities. Overfil-
tering content effectively limits the
acquisition of the digital-literacy
Michelle Luhtala
skills required to participate fully
in a globally competitive and demo- [email protected]
Just as lists of commonly
cratic 21st-century society (Hobbs
2010). The ALA study also recog- banned books help promote
AASL designates the Wednesday
nizes the role of school librarians of Banned Books Week as Banned Books Week, lists
in overcoming challenges to digital
Banned Websites Awareness Day featuring blocked sites fuel
literacy and increasing the capacity
(BWAD). By embedding the
of educators to integrate technology conversation. In observance
event in the American Library
into learning tasks and curriculum Association’s long -standing of Banned Websites
in the classroom (ALA 2013).
censorship-awareness campaign, Awareness Day 2015
BWAD formally directs national
(September 30), readers
Recommendations attention to Internet filtering’s
impact on teaching and learning. are invited to contribute
This report offers four recommenda-
BWAD aims to promote dialog to a crowd- sourced list of
tions to align current practices with
among educators about digital
the requirements of the law. The ALA blocked sites.
citizenship. Teaching students to
should:
navigate the Web critically and
to develop a personal cognitive
1. Through education and
Internet filter empowers them
awareness campaigns, increase
to take charge of their own Just as lists of commonly banned
awareness of the spectrum of
learning and builds their books help promote Banned Books
filtering choices and exactly what
decision-making capacity. Week, lists featuring blocked sites
the law requires.
fuel conversation. In observance
School librarians are encour- of Banned Websites Awareness Day
2. Develop a toolkit for school
aged to involve their learning 2015 (September 30), readers are
leaders to help realign filtering
communities in observing invited to contribute to a crowd-
and Internet access policies.
BWAD. For example, in Silver sourced list of blocked sites. The
Creek, Colorado, students list can be accessed
3. Create a digital repository of
participated in a graffiti debate, at <http://bit.ly/
materials to house existing
wrestling with the delinea- aaslbwadlist>,
research, surveys, and case
tion between constructive and which is linked to
studies on Internet filtering.
obstructive filtering. In New the QR code.
Other types of information to
York City, students sent letters
collect include anecdotes and
of protest to their board of
best practices from librarians as
education members pleading
well as examples of responsible-
for more access to Web content. Michelle Luhtala
use policies and digital-literacy
In New Trier, Illinois, students is the Library
lesson plans.
conducted surveys of the
Department chair
student body about filtering.
4. Conduct long- and short-term at New Canaan
In New Canaan, Connecti-
research to explore the educa-
cut, where students have open High School and
tional use of social media and
access to much of the Web, the professional learning facilitator for
other digital tools to support
access to Facebook, YouTube,
learning. Research also should edWeb, a professional online community for
and Twitter was blocked for six
assess the impact of filtering on educators <edweb.net>. She serves as the
hours to show solidarity for
student learning and achieve-
students trying to learn in more Region I Director on the AASL Board of
ment.
restricted environments. Directors. She blogs at <Bibliotech.me>.
Volume 44, No. 1 | September/October 2015 65
All materials in this journal subject to copyright by the American Library Association
may be used for the noncommercial purpose of scientific or educational advancement
granted by Sections 107 and 108 of the Copyright Revision Act of 1976. Address
usage requests to the ALA Office of Rights and Permissions.
Works Cited:
New Internet Filtering
American Association of School Deloitte Enterprise Risk Services.
Interpretation Approved Librarians. 2012. “School 2008. Safer Internet: Synthesis
Libraries Count! Supplemental Report. <www.cyberethics.info/
by ALA Council Report on Filtering.” <www.ala. cyethics1/images/stories/pdf/
org/aasl/sites/ala.org.aasl/files/ sip_benchmarkfilteringtools_
content/researchandstatistics/ synthesis_2008.pdf> (accessed
On June 30, 2015 the ALA Council slcsurvey/2012/AASL-SLC- March 9, 2015).
approved “Internet Filtering: An filtering-2012-WEB.pdf> (accessed Fuchs, Lamont H. 2012. “Impact of
Interpretation of the Library Bill March 2, 2015). Filtered Internet Access on Student
of Rights.” The new interpretation American Civil Liberties Union of Learning in Public Schools.” PhD
was created by the ALA Intellectual Rhode Island. 2013. Access Denied: diss., Walden University.
How Internet Filtering in Schools Harms Gardner, Howard et al. 2011. Our
Freedom Committee, and it took a
Public Education. <http://riaclu.org/ Space: Being a Responsible Citizen of
year for the committee to complete images/uploads/Access_Denied-_ the Digital World: A Collaboration of
the document. The interpretation How_Internet_Filtering_in_Schools_ the GoodPlay Project and Project New
Harms_Public_Education.pdf> Media Literacies. <http://dmlcentral.
is located at <www.ala.org/
(accessed March 2, 2015). net/sites/dmlcentral/files/resource_
advocacy/intfreedom/librarybill/ American Library Association. Office files/Our_Space_full_casebook_
interpretations/internet-filtering/>. for Information Technology Policy. compressed.pdf> (accessed March
Digital Literacy Task Force. 2013. 10, 2015).
Digital Literacy, Libraries, and Public Hobbs, Renee. 2010. Digital and Media
Policy. <www.districtdispatch.org/ Literacy: A Plan of Action. Washington,
wp-content/uploads/2013/01/2012_ DC: Aspen Institute. <www.
OITP_digilitreport_1_22_13.pdf> knightcomm.org/wp-content/
The full text of the report, including (accessed March 4, 2015). uploads/2010/12/Digital_and_
the four recommendations, is Ayre, Lori Bowen. 2004. Filtering Media_Literacy_A_Plan_of_Action.
available free at <http://connect.ala. and Filter Software. Chicago: ALA pdf> (accessed March 10, 2015).
org/files/cipa_report.pdf>. TechSource. Houghton-Jan, Sarah. 2010.
Caldwell-Stone, Deborah. 2013. “Internet Filtering.” Library
“Filtering and the First Amendment: Technology Reports 46 (8): 25–33.
More than a decade ago, Internet filters
When Is It OK to Block Speech McCarthy, Martha M. 2004.
appeared to be a simple way to ensure an Online?” American Libraries (April 2). “Filtering the Internet: The
age-appropriate learning environment. <www.americanlibrariesmagazine. Children’s Internet Protection Act.”
Today, it is critical to recognize the org/article/filtering-and-first- Education Horizons. 82 (2): 108–113.
amendment> (accessed March 6,
unequal and uneven impact of filters’ 2015). National School Boards Association.
implementation. Because Internet 2007. “Creating & Connecting:
Children’s Internet Protection Act Research and Guidelines on
users are not only consumers but also (CIPA). Public Law 106-554. Online Social—and Educational—
creators of content, Internet filters and 2000. 47 U.S.C. § 254. 2003. Networking.” <http://grunwald.
access policies must be realigned with Chmara, Theresa. 2010. “Minors’ com/pdfs/Grunwald_NSBA_Study_
First Amendment Rights: CIPA & Kids_Social_Media.pdf> (accessed
the dynamic, interactive, and social
School Libraries.” Knowledge Quest. March 12, 2015).
uses of the Internet if all students are 39 (1): 16–21.
to benefit fully from the technological
opportunities available today and in the
future. This realignment will require
less blocking of online content and
platforms and more digital-literacy
instruction to protect and empower
students both online and offline. Kristen R. Batch an international media development
is a consultant for organization, she served as lead program
School librarians are key to
the ALA Office for officer for a global program to address
overcoming the challenges of digital
Information Technology issues of Internet censorship. Previously, she
literacy. They are well positioned
to shape curricula to accompany Policy in Washington, coordinated research and teams of experts
changes in Internet access policy DC. She authored the ALA report Fencing to develop guidance on a broad range of
and to help students acquire the
Out Knowledge: Impacts of the technology policy issues for the National
digital-literacy skills they need to
Children’s Internet Protection Research Council’s Computer Science and
be college- and career-ready and to
participate fully in today’s society. Act 10 Years Later. At Internews, Telecommunications Board.
66 Knowledge Quest | Intellectual Freedom