Creative ICT News

A Little Local Difficulty

Yesterday (30th October) the Manchester Evening News was carrying banner headlines about children accessing porn on school computers. My initial thought was, "Here we go again, yet another internet scare story involving schools." I just loved the article's opening sentence: "HUNDREDS of kids are looking at pornography on school computers every day." Not looking to pull punches then?

The article goes on to show how the private company, "e-safe education", part of Zentek, conducted research into web use at "40 primary and secondaries in the county." Confusingly, in the comments below the article, Colin McKeown, MD of e-safe stated, in response to my own comment that, "The data we have evaluated [was] from across the UK, not just Manchester..." (my bracket). I also added a further comment asking for clarification as to what constituted a "serious alert" which has not appeared below the article.

So, what we have is a story about some "research" (no links provided as to where this research might be published) by a company specialising in e-safety solutions. It's not entirely clear if the research is local, and it's not clear what constituted a serious alert. And, since the company conducting the research are peddling e-safety solutions, it could hardly claim to be independent either.

In fairness, I think the article, although somewhat sensationalised (hey, it's a local newspaper) does have a point, and it's this: schools simply have to start taking responsibility for their own web connections, instead of relying upon the local authority filters. I've blogged about this before:

• Proxy bypasses in schools
• Who is responsible for the filter 

 I also added a comment about my own experiences about monitoring the internet at my primary school at the foot of an article by Ewan Macintosh . The software in use at this school was, I believe, supplied by these people: Forensic Software.co.uk who, presumably are a competitor of E-safe Education. I feel bound to point out that I have no relationship with this company other than to say that their software is excellent.

So, let's see the research; let's understand what constitutes a serious threat before we make such sweeping generalised statements as this article does. It's interesting to note that when I last checked the article only had 8 comments attached, which compares exceedingly poorly to any article that is posted about the Manchester congestion charge. Could it be that the public can smell a rat, or are they simply not interested?

Proxy Bypass, Coming to a Primary School Near You

If you enter the words "proxy bypass" into Google you get 293,000 results, many of which will contain detailed and fairly simple instructions on how to bypass your school's and local authority filters. For the most part this is done to gain access to social networking sites such as Bebo and MySpace. In the main, good monitoring of your school's web activity can spot this sort of thing going on and can take steps to block it. Secondaries have become very adept and spotting suspicious surf patterns among students (and staff) and until now  it has largely been assumed to be a secondary school proble.

Last week a primary school in Manchester where I work  discovered a Year 6 pupil had set up a proxy bypass and was downloading all kinds of unsuitable material (they also warned a temporary member of staff about doing exactly the same thing - setting up a bypass, that is). In past blog posts I have ranted more than a little about the irrelevance of filter systems and the need for better education and better monitoring, so, which of the following apply in your primary school?

• Children have individual logins so individual surf patterns can be tracked;
• Someone on the staff is trained and can routinely check web activity;
• Someone on the staff knows how to block/unblock websites;
• You have internet monitoring software installed on your network.

I'm guessing that for most primary schools that none of the above apply.

We are rapidly getting to a situation where the existing complacency around web filtering in primary schools is no longer tenable (massive generalisation, I know, but in the last 18 months I have been in over 100 primary schools and can count on one hand the number with proactive web monitoring systems). Children and staff are actively seeking ways to get around the filters and nobody in the school even knows. The only reason that the above mentioned primary spotted the problem is that it is someone's job every week to check the web access reports.

What's the solution? Certainly not more filtering, as web access becomes cheaper and cheaper and the skills to get around filters becomes more widely disseminated (how many of the children in your school have elder siblings at secondary? How many have web access on their mobiles?), filters are becoming redundant. No, the answer is much better monitoring; back that up by an active Acceptable Use Policy; and finally much better education for staff and children alike on the issues surrounding internet safety, safe surfing habits and educational use.

Who is responsible for the filter?

The vexed subject of web-filtering in schools has raised its ugly head in the educational blogosphere again. Two recent examples: Doug Dickinson and Ewan McIntosh. It's a subject which I have to be careful about lest I descend into my usual "They don't know what they're doing" rant. As someone who has been an ICT co-ordinator for ten years and as a trainer for various software companies I have seen the inflexibility of filter systems in action all too often:

• This week I was trying to teach web searching using the Olympics as an example. Nothing controversial about that until you realised that the school's filters blocked the string "pics";
• I've trained in a nameless NW LEA which purchased a hugely expensive online content system for its schools, then proceeded to block half the content, including all resources ending with the file extension .mp3. Podcasting is a challenge;
• I've been in far too many schools where teachers don't use the web much anymore: they can't be bothered to search for resources at home only to find them blocked in school;
• And here's the clincher: I ask them, "Why don't you get the resource unblocked?" And the response is all too predictable and will take one of two forms, "I don't know how," or, "It will take weeks, and I can't be bothered."

This is a depressing situation; but what could be done to improve it? First, at the risk of stating the obvious, those responsible for the filters should consider the wider government agenda of getting children to access the internet from home in order to use tools such as their school's learning platform. Do they imagine that these children will be using heavily filtered and monitored web services while they are doing this? Secondly, as we move to a 3G internet world in which children are accessing the web via mobile devices, do people consider that these will have a largely unfiltered view of the web? In such a world, web filters are rapidly becoming redundant.

The answer is surely not more filtering, but education. I consider the Acceptable Use Policy to be one of the cornerstone policies in a school, right up there with behaviour, anti-bullying and special needs policies. It should be reviewed annually by all staff; it should be actively promoted at school and to parents; and above all, it should be ACTIVE! By that, I mean that schools should be actively monitoring their web connections; they should be holding transgressors (staff and children) to account; and they should be educating everyone about internet safety and developing a responsible attitude towards the web.

In too many schools I have visited the attitude towards computer safety is utterly complacent (I don't use that phrase lightly), and it manifests itself in various ways:

• Children don't have individual logins to school computers (how is this going to help accountability? How is it going to help children understand the importance of keeping PIN numbers and logins private?);
• No monitoring of the internet;
• Everyone signs an AUP on entry, and it is never seen again;
• If web safety is taught, it's often a one off project.

I believe that making local authorities responsible for web filtering has engendered this attitude. Schools simply take the easy option and rely on the local authority to provide a "safe" web connection, ergo it's one less thing to worry about.

Monitoring your school's internet use need not be difficult or time consuming. Most modern cache boxes include monitoring tools and the ability for the user to block sites and users very quickly and simply. Many, if not most, schools have such technology, but often haven't been shown how to use it. This well established technology can be very effectively backed up by the use of keystroke monitoring software which records violations when banned strings of letters are entered by a user. In other words, if someone types an inappropriate term into a search engine, it will record it, regardless of whether the user actually hit the enter key! This software will give you a comprehensive idea of what is happening on your school's network at the expense of about 5 minutes a day. I used just such a system at Crumpsall Lane Primary School as ICT co-ordinator, and I can honestly say I wouldn't be without it. It meant our school's AUP was active, and our users knew it was active. The result was a fairly liberal internet filter which allowed teachers to teach and children to learn while at the same time developed a responsible attitude towards the web. For more info about this, read my comment on Ewan's blog post. Note that I can't find the software that was used at Crumpsall, but I believe this will achieve something similar.

So, what's the solution? Actually, it's quite simple, make schools responsible for their own web filter and not local authorities. That way schools can discuss what's acceptable and what's not with their own communities. Meaningful discussion will hopefully result, and an AUP that is a purposeful and active document.

What Message does this give out?

I was profoundly depressed by this article on the BBC Education website today. I wonder what thinking lay behind the notion that it would be a good idea to put photos of children on to the school website, and then blur their faces? I have always felt that a good school website should celebrate the achievements and successes of a school, and this should include pictures of children - after all that's what schools are about. Green Park Primary School in Maghull is an excellent example of a school that uses photographs extensively to celebrate the excellence that goes on within its walls. By all means discuss what's right for your school at a local level, but I would suggest that a sensible policy might include:

• no linking of names to images
• group photos only
• allow parents to opt out of having their child appear on the school's website
• consider whether "at risk" children should appear at all

Surely in the case of the Essex school above, a "no photos" policy would be better than the faceless and slightly uncomfortable message that rubbing out faces gives. I wonder what the children think about it? But I guess they weren't asked.

Nothing like a bit of hysteria

My thanks to Jayne at Chorlton Park for alerting me to tonight's Panorama "One Click From Danger". No prizes awarded for guessing the subject matter. As usual Ewan McIntosh has already commented on this on his blog and I would have little to add except to say that I find the whole internet hysteria thing depressing. Back in November I blogged about an e-safety conference in Stockport. It seems that we really are not interested in giving children the tools and skills necessary to use the internet positively and safely (let's face it, it's not rocket science) instead we just wring our hands and let people who are not educationalists filter our schools' web access with predictably ridiculously inconsistent results turning teachers off the power of the internet to educate and inspire. OK rant over, off to a quiet room for a lie down.

Not sure if I can bear to watch Panorama later on...

An opportunity missed, but the message must get across

I attended a conference today run by Stockport Local Authority entitled "Children and the Net". I was expecting lots of guidance and direction on what schools should be telling children. Instead the audience was treated to an in depth study on the law and how it related to child abuse, plus lots of case discussion of very distressing incidents - some of which had nothing at all to do with the Internet. While I don't for a minute decry the necessity to raise awareness of the issue of internet predators, I wonder whether the audience had rather gone beyond the need to highlight the problem and were in fact looking for guidance on issues surrounding cyberbullying on which precious little was imparted.

It seems to me that the extensive filtering of the net by local authorities that has gone on in schools has led to the issue of Internet safety being left somewhat on the backburner as schools have backed off the responsibility to the LA. In many cases, schools haven't delivered a consistent message on e-safety simply due to lack of knowledge and it's about time that the mettle was grasped and the issue no longer ignored.

Fortunately there are some great resources on the web for schools to use:

Thinkuknow is an excellent resource covering all the major danger areas, and for KS2 children it contains a cybercafe with lots of interactive things to do. It might be a little text intensive for less able readers and will require a lot of direction and discussion in class. It's an essential site to use.

BBC Chatguide is another super website which has the potential to be a real eye-opener to those of us who don't use chatrooms much. PAW (parents are watching) and POS (parents over shoulder) are two acronyms that I certainly shan't forget. There is also an excellent video that can be downloaded and watched, as well as some teacher resources.

There are plenty of other sites around, many of which can be found by looking at the Internet Watch Foundation's website or via Ceop.

Two essential messages remain: one is to encourage children to report abuse and cyberbullying: many site are now starting to use the "report abuse button" with the "Virtual Global Taskforce" eye logo. This is usually displayed as a red rectangular button as seen here, but is also displayed as a logo only on some sites e.g. Windows Live Messenger (formerly MSN).

The second message is to hammer in the acronym ALS (age location sex) until they fully understand the implications of giving out personal data on the net (in this case, location includes email address, phone numbers etc). There is some really good material on Thinkuknow to support this message.

Try showing your class the Virtual Global Taskforce logo and ask them if they know what that means when they see it on the web? It should be as well known to them as Childline is.

Other useful sites include:

http://www.need2know.co.uk/beatbullying/

http://bblic.com

http://beatbullying.org

http://www.childnet-int.org/jenny/ (excellent DVD available to order)

http://www.barnardos.org.uk/reducingtherisk (some excellent resources to order)

And finally, this link is to a video, and although a little bit glib and American, it does make you think about how forthcoming you are online: http://www.netsmartz.org/stories/teresa.htm

Teachers, the social web and professional responsibility

Back in 2003 when I was working with my class in Think.com one of the most immediate and noticeable effects was the way my relationship with the class changed - no longer did they see me as a slightly separate species of human being that lived in a cupboard at the back of the classroom only to emerge blinking into the daylight when the school bell went. This, I felt was a very positive thing. My Think.com home page was intended as a model for children to develop and I would talk about my sporting interests on it. Also, I would post "stickies" (Think.com speak for post it notes) to give feedback on children's webpages at a time that suited me (often in the evening). What I didn't consider was the potential ramifications of having an online "conversation" with children in the evening as I was very careful to ensure that all comments were strictlly limited to the development of websites. In addition, we had developed a comprehensive Internet policy which made it clear that access rules applied out of school as well as at home.

In Scotland, because of the development of a national network (Glow) this issue has been actively discussed in the blogosphere. Here's one article from Ewan McIntosh that shows how easy it is for things that teachers do could get misinterpreted. Th General Teaching Council for Scotland has just released it's draft code on professionalism and conduct. And here is Ewan's response.

I must admit, it never occurred to me back in 2003 that commenting on children's work live and online in the evening when those children were also potentially online would be open to misinterpretation, perhaps because I was very comfortable with drawing the lines between professional and personal  and knew what felt right for me. Now that we are all rushing headlong into developing extended schools through the use of VLEs, blogs, wikis etc maybe we need to think about this issue a little more. In particular, it concerns me that teachers new to the profession will have gone through college using Facebook and the like and it's only going to take one image of a student teacher doing something inappropriate at a party for media hysteria to ensue. I've no idea if teaching colleges advise students on this issue, but they surely should. Similarly, as a headteacher I would be talking to my staff about the implications of the use of social networks like Facebook and Bebo.

Currently, there is a review being conducted in England looking at these very issues chaired by Dr Tanya Byron. Due to report in March 2008, its website can be found here.

Finger in the Dyke time!

So Chris Keates, General Secretary of the NASUWT, thinks that mobile phones should be classified as "potentially offensive weapons" (BBC Tech News, 26 June 2007). No surprise there: although one can only sympathise with the awful situation that colleagues find themselves in when being victimised through the use of mobile phones. But is banning really the solution, and can it practically work? Mobile phones are getting slimmer and easier to hide by the day and children are perfectly capable of texting "blind" (i.e. with their phones out of sight and in a bag). That we have a problem with some children is undeniable: the media jumps on to every instance of "happy slapping" posted on Youtube, but exactly how big is the problem in relation to overall phone ownership? I'm not sure that I've read any statistics on this; is it another case of media hysteria?

I'm minded to think of those Luddites who saw the Industrial Revolution as a threat to their economic well-being and way of life and can't help but think that there are still many teachers in the profession who are harking back to a simpler age without IT. Mobile phones and mobile computer technology are rapidly converging to the point where it will soon be impossible to distinguish between phone, mp3 player and Personal Digital Assistants. And, are we protecting children from adults with mobile phones and banning them in schools too? I know of at least one instance of a teacher photographing children in a Manchester school that resulted in sacking, and can think of many occasions where I've seen or heard a teacher take a phone call or send a text.

No, banning is retrograde and offensive. Mobile phones are here to stay and the education sector needs to find an accommodation with them through promoting responsible use, anti-bullying policies and education etc, while cracking down on the cyber-bullies. You never know, in a few years time we may regard them as essential tools of the trade and they may well be the way children communicate with the school's network, instead of via the clunky pc in the corner of the classroom.

European Safer Internet Day

Internet safety has hit the headlines yet again, today. In case you weren’t aware, today is European Safer Internet day and a Government Minister, Mary Hanafin, announced a new safety website for parents and children to get information from.

Here’s a link to the TES story

And here’s a link to the new website: http://www.webwise.ie/

Interestingly, it has some information about online gaming – how many parents have realised that the latest gaming consoles can be connected to the internet and allows them to chat online with fellow gamers? A parent recently told me of an incident when her child was playing online Reversi and was verbally abused when she beat an opponent!

In case you didn't already know about the Internet Proficiency scheme, it's a very useful scheme of work with worksheets, online resources and in depth planning, as well as informative sections on the issues surrounding Internet safety. Here's the link:

http://safety.ngfl.gov.uk/schools/index.php3?S=3