The massive iPad adoption in California caught the attention of most tech enthusiasts and then came the glitch. Students figured out how to hack the iPads and use them in ways that we’re not intended. Schools have reacted by restricting use of the devices.
Some prominent education bloggers responded to this action by pretty much putting down the school and praising the skills and motivation of the students. Reminds of a kind of “anti-establishment” position often adopted in the 60s. Stick it to the man.
I think this position is ill-advised and damaging. Cute, but not smart. It puts the schools in a bad position.
Anyone following my posts knows my general approach to things is quite liberal. However, I think there are limits to how I act on these beliefs. I can certainly advocate for my beliefs. I can act on them when it comes to my own kids. It can become inappropriate when I go too much further. I should not encourage children by ridiculing their parents (I might argue with the parents but not in front of the kids). I kind of feel the same way about schools.
Here are two related thoughts:
1) These are school computers and not the computers of the students. I think schools have a right to control how equipment is used in the school. Schools are judged by those they serve and the general public. If parents want to take responsibility (which I am not certain they can) for what students do with the computers in schools this would be a different thing. If parents want to take responsibility for what students do in the home, this is a different thing. Just as a matter of practicality – how would situational differences in actions be accomplished. You can’t really hack and “unhack” the device depending on the location. I guess filtering kind of does that.
2) I have published several papers (actually as a second author to one of my graduate students) investigating cyberbullying. This was not a primary interest of mine, but kind of a necessary reaction to the restrictions of filtering in schools. I felt the technology applications I propose were very difficult to implement because of filtering and I argued that the data on cyberbullying justified this position. Very few incidents of cyberbullying utilize school equipment (you never say never, but the percentage is estimated at about 4% if I remember correctly). Restricting the use of equipment that was not the source of the problem seemed a political reaction and not an actual fix in my way of thinking.
I cannot justify this argument with phones and tablets. What is actually happening on these devices simply cannot be monitored in the same way school personnel can monitor what appears on computer monitors. I am not necessarily against BYOD models, but the argument I was willing to make in favor of more open access is far weaker in this situation. As the strength of the argument switches drastically I am far less judgmental of school actions that seem more conservative. School personnel cannot really give up their responsibilities to all of the children and to all of the parents. I am not certain what the appropriate course of action is in this situation, but let us at least not be cute by implying that school personnel are uninformed, backward, or stodgy.
